--- title: "Mustalah Hadith Made Easy (Part 5) - Hasan Sahih, Hasan Ghareeb and Ziyadah al-Thiqah" canonical: https://arriqaaq.com/mustalah-hadith-ziyadah-thiqah-hasan-sahih/ published: 2026-10-23T02:00:00.000Z updated: 2026-10-23T02:00:00.000Z tags: ["Hadith"] author: "Arriqaaq" --- # Mustalah Hadith Made Easy (Part 5) - Hasan Sahih, Hasan Ghareeb and Ziyadah al-Thiqah *In the Name of Allah, The Most Gracious, The Most Merciful…* Have you ever noticed the short verdict at the end of a hadith in Jami al-Tirmidhi? Sometimes it is one word, "hasan", "sahih" or "ghareeb", and sometimes two side by side: "hasan sahih", or "hasan ghareeb". If hasan is lesser than sahih, how can one hadith be both? And if ghareeb is what has a sole narrator, how can it also be hasan? In [the previous part, on sahih and hasan](/mustalah-hadith-sahih-hasan/), we divided the maqbool report into sahih and hasan. In this part we read the statement of al-Tirmidhi about these combined words, and then we ask: what happens when one thiqah (trustworthy) narrator reports a word, or a link in the chain, that the others did not? That is **ziyadah al-thiqah**. We finish with a case study, the hadith on moving the finger. > **Note**: Don't worry if *mahfooz*, *shaadh* and *qaraain* are new to you. Mahfooz and shaadh come with their definitions and a real example, the qaraain with the words of the scholars on them, and the figure in the middle of the lesson lets you weigh the three kinds of ziyadah for yourself. --- ## The story in five steps Here is the path we are about to walk. [[SVG:mh-ziyadah-steps]] Here is the map of how narrations are classified, as far as the last part built it. This part adds one branch inside the maqbool: ziyadah al-thiqah, the ziyadah (addition) of the narrator of the sahih and the hasan. (Ibn Hajar, *Nuzhat al-Nazar fee Tawdih Nukhbat al-Fikar*, ed. Itr, [p. 68](https://app.turath.io/book/1565?page=64)) Press Next to add it, one step at a time, and press any word to read what it means. [[WIDGET:mh-map-5]] --- ## Al-Tirmidhi's "hasan sahih" **About:** Imam Abu Isa al-Tirmidhi wrote a book known as *Al-Ilal* (or *Al-Ilal al-Saghir*), which is often published along with *Jami al-Tirmidhi*, or *Sunan al-Tirmidhi* as it is more commonly known. In *Al-Ilal*, he mentioned some important introductory points to let the reader know about what he has included in his Sunan. (al-Tirmidhi, *Al-Ilal al-Saghir*, at the end of Jami al-Tirmidhi, ed. Bashar, [6/227](https://app.turath.io/book/642?page=1)) **Regarding hasan sahih:** the statement "hasan sahih" has some difficulty. Hasan is lesser than sahih, so to say that a hadith is "hasan sahih" affirms its lesser status and, at the same time (by saying sahih), negates its lesser status. How is this combined? (*Min Atyab al-Minah fi Ilm al-Mustalah*, p. 25) Hafidh Ibn Hajar answered this by saying that if a hadith is assigned hasan and sahih at the same time, then it is not free from one of two possibilities: it will either be **ghareeb**, narrated by one narrator, or it will **not be ghareeb**. (*Min Atyab al-Minah fi Ilm al-Mustalah*, p. 25) 1. **As for the first case (ghareeb),** al-Tirmidhi's words "hasan sahih" mean that the sole narrator in that chain is not dhabit like that in sahih, nor is he light in dabt such that his hadith can be called hasan. Thus the original wording is "hasan **or** sahih", which is shortened as hasan sahih. This hadith is lesser in status than the hadith about which we can say sahih with authority. (*Min Atyab al-Minah fi Ilm al-Mustalah*, p. 25) 2. **As for the second case, when it is not ghareeb,** the reason for using "hasan sahih" is the presence of two chains: a hadith whose one chain is sahih and second chain is hasan. Here the original wording is "hasan **and** sahih", which is shortened as hasan sahih. This hadith is greater in status than the hadith about which we can say sahih, due to the presence of another chain. (*Min Atyab al-Minah fi Ilm al-Mustalah*, p. 25) Ibn Hajar's own words for the first case: > فَإِنْ جُمِعا أيْ الصحيحُ والحَسَنُ في وصفٍ واحدٍ كقَوْل الترمذي وغيرِه "حديثٌ حَسَنٌ صحيح" فَلِلترَدُّدِ الحاصِلِ من المجتهد في الناقِل، هل اجتمعَتْ فيه شروطُ الصحة أو قَصرَ عنها، وهذا حيثُ يحصلُ منه التفرُّدُ بتلك الرواية. > > "If the two, sahih and hasan, are combined in one description, like the saying of al-Tirmidhi and others 'a hasan sahih hadith', then it is because of the hesitation of the mujtahid about the narrator: did the conditions of sahih come together in him, or did he fall short of them? This is where he is alone in that narration." > > (Ibn Hajar, *Nuzhat al-Nazar fee Tawdih Nukhbat al-Fikar*, ed. Itr, [p. 66](https://app.turath.io/book/1565?page=62)) **Example:** Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) said, "Were I not afraid that it would be hard on my followers, I would order them to use the siwak (as obligatory, for cleaning the teeth) at every prayer." This hadith is reported by the Shaykhayn (al-Bukhari and Muslim) with a sahih chain, and al-Tirmidhi narrated it via the route of Muhammad bin Amr, as mentioned in [the previous part, under sahih li-ghayrihi](/mustalah-hadith-sahih-hasan/#sahih-li-ghayrihi). He is differed upon with regards to tasheeh and tahseen (his hadith being sahih or hasan). That is the reason al-Tirmidhi combined hasan and sahih after this hadith. (*Min Atyab al-Minah fi Ilm al-Mustalah*, p. 25; [Sahih al-Bukhari 887, 2/4](https://app.turath.io/book/1681?page=1448); [Sahih Muslim 252, 1/220](https://app.turath.io/book/1727?page=535); [Jami al-Tirmidhi 22, ed. Shakir, 1/34](https://app.turath.io/book/1435?page=43)) Hafidh Ibn Daqiq al-Eid said: "There is no conflict between sahih and hasan except where it (the hadith) is hasan at most; then there is conflict. If a hadith reaches the level of sahih, then the conditions of hasan will follow it (meaning it will also be hasan), because the higher status does not negate the lower status. Thus, it will be correct to say that it is sahih at the highest level and hasan at the lowest level." (*Min Atyab al-Minah fi Ilm al-Mustalah*, p. 26) In simpler terms: for a ghareeb hadith, "hasan sahih" is "hasan **or** sahih"; for a hadith with two chains, it is "hasan **and** sahih". :::pause - Why does the statement "hasan sahih" have some difficulty? Because hasan is lesser than sahih: calling a hadith "hasan sahih" affirms its lesser status and, by saying sahih, negates it at the same time. - According to Ibn Hajar, what does "hasan sahih" mean when the hadith is not ghareeb? The presence of two chains, one sahih and one hasan. The original wording is "hasan and sahih", and the hadith is greater in status than the one about which we can say sahih. - What did Ibn Daqiq al-Eid say about sahih and hasan together? There is no conflict between sahih and hasan except where it is hasan at most. If a hadith reaches the level of sahih, it will also be hasan, because the higher status does not negate the lower: it is sahih at the highest level and hasan at the lowest level. ::: --- ## Al-Tirmidhi's "hasan ghareeb" **Regarding hasan ghareeb:** some scholars have objected to the combining of hasan and ghareeb by Imam al-Tirmidhi. According to al-Tirmidhi, hasan is that which is reported by other routes, whereas ghareeb is that which has a sole narrator (at some level of the chain). Is this not a contradiction? (*Min Atyab al-Minah fi Ilm al-Mustalah*, p. 27) Here are al-Tirmidhi's own words on hasan, at the end of his Jami. We met them in English in [the part on the ahaad, mashhoor, aziz and ghareeb](/mustalah-hadith-ahad-mashhur-aziz-gharib/): > وَمَا ذَكَرْنَا فِي هَذَا الْكِتَابِ حَدِيثٌ حَسَنٌ فَإِنَّمَا أَرَدْنَا بِهِ حُسْنَ إِسْنَادِهِ عِنْدَنَا. كُلُّ حَدِيثٍ يُرْوَى لَا يَكُونُ فِي إِسْنَادِهِ مَنْ يُتَّهَمُ بِالْكَذِبِ، وَلَا يَكُونُ الْحَدِيثُ شَاذًّا، وَيُرْوَى مِنْ غَيْرِ وَجْهٍ نَحْوَ ذَلِكَ- فَهُوَ عِنْدَنَا حَدِيثٌ حَسَنٌ. > > "Whenever we have said in this book 'a hasan hadith', we meant by it that its chain is hasan according to us: every hadith that is related that does not have in its chain someone who is accused of lying, nor is the hadith shadh, and it is narrated through more than one route, like that: then it is a hasan hadith according to us." > > (al-Tirmidhi, *Al-Ilal al-Saghir*, at the end of Jami al-Tirmidhi, ed. Bashar, [6/251](https://app.turath.io/book/642?page=74)) Hafidh Ibn Hajar responded to this: the istilah (terminology) of al-Tirmidhi about "hasan" should be restricted only to the hadith about which he said only "hasan". When he uses the words hasan ghareeb, they should be understood based on the istilah of the jumhoor (the majority). Based on this terminology, there is no conflict in combining hasan and ghareeb. (*Min Atyab al-Minah fi Ilm al-Mustalah*, p. 27) In his words: > فالجوابُ: أنّ الترمذيَّ لمْ يُعَرِّفِ الحَسَنَ مطلقًا، وإنما عَرَّف نوعًا خاصًّا منه وقع في كتابه، وهو ما يقول فيه: "حَسَنٌ" من غير صفةٍ أخرى > > "The answer is that al-Tirmidhi did not define hasan in general. He only defined a particular kind of it that occurs in his book: what he calls 'hasan' with no other description." > > (Ibn Hajar, *Nuzhat al-Nazar fee Tawdih Nukhbat al-Fikar*, ed. Itr, [p. 67](https://app.turath.io/book/1565?page=63)) Al-Tirmidhi himself, at the end of his Jami, on the word ghareeb: > وَمَا ذَكَرْنَا فِي هَذَا الْكِتَابِ حَدِيثٌ غَرِيبٌ فَإِنَّ أَهْلَ الْحَدِيثِ يَسْتَغْرِبُونَ الْحَدِيثَ لِمَعَانٍ: رُبَّ حَدِيثٍ يَكُونُ غَرِيبًا لَا يُرْوَى إِلَّا مِنْ وَجْهٍ وَاحِدٍ … وَرُبَّ حَدِيثٍ يُرْوَى مِنْ أَوْجُهٍ كَثِيرَةٍ، وَإِنَّمَا يُسْتَغْرَبُ لِحَالِ الْإِسْنَادِ. > > "Whenever we have said in this book 'a ghareeb hadith', the people of hadith call a hadith ghareeb for several reasons: many a hadith is ghareeb, narrated from one route only … and many a hadith is narrated from many routes, and it is only called ghareeb because of the state of the chain." > > (al-Tirmidhi, *Al-Ilal al-Saghir*, at the end of Jami al-Tirmidhi, ed. Bashar, [6/251–253](https://app.turath.io/book/642?page=75)) Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah said: "Those who critique al-Tirmidhi do not understand most of his statements. If a scholar of hadith says about a hadith that it is ghareeb, what they mean is that it is ghareeb through this route, and sometimes they also clarify it, though that hadith may be sahih or ma'roof according to them. Thus, when a hadith is reported through a chain, it may be ghareeb via that chain though its matn may be sahih and ma'roof. For this reason, if al-Tirmidhi says about a hadith that it is hasan ghareeb, it would mean that this hadith is ghareeb with respect to this chain, and its matn is hasan based on shawaahid (supporting narrations)." (Ibn Taymiyyah, *Majmu al-Fatawa*, [18/24](https://app.turath.io/book/7289?page=9160); *Min Atyab al-Minah fi Ilm al-Mustalah*, p. 28) Al-Albani said: "The hadith about which al-Tirmidhi says hasan-ghareeb is stronger than the hadith about which he says hasan only. That is because the former means that it is hasan in and of itself (hasan li-thaatih), while the latter means that it is hasan by the support of other ahadith (hasan li-ghayrih). Al-Tirmidhi clarified (his terminology of) the hasan hadith at the end of his book, the Sunan, and Ibn Hajar highlighted it in *Sharh an-Nukhbah* (p. 11, al-Maymaniyyah), and then he declared (on p. 25) that this kind of hadith is inferior to the rank of hasan li-thaatih [i.e. hasan ghareeb]." :::pause - Why did some scholars object to al-Tirmidhi combining hasan and ghareeb? Because according to al-Tirmidhi, hasan is reported by other routes, whereas ghareeb has a sole narrator at some level of the chain. - How did Ibn Hajar answer the objection? Al-Tirmidhi's terminology of "hasan" is restricted to the hadith about which he said only "hasan". Hasan ghareeb is understood by the terminology of the majority, so there is no conflict. - Think about it: Ibn Taymiyyah says a hadith may be ghareeb via one chain while its matn is sahih and ma'roof. How does that help with "hasan ghareeb"? ::: --- ## Ziyadah al-Thiqah: an added word In uloom al-hadith, concern towards ziyadah al-thiqah is recommended. Ziyadah can also be found in the sanad, as in the matn: for example, making a mawqoof report marfoo, and a munqati report muttasil. (*Min Atyab al-Minah fi Ilm al-Mustalah*, p. 29) Ibn al-Salah has classified ziyadah al-thiqah into three categories, which is endorsed by al-Nawawi as well as Ibn Hajar. (*Min Atyab al-Minah fi Ilm al-Mustalah*, p. 29; Ibn al-Salah, *Muqaddimah*, ed. Itr, [p. 86](https://app.turath.io/book/22870?page=83)) Ibn Hajar's words: > وزيادةُ راويهما -أي الصحيحِ والحسنِ- مقبولةٌ، ما لم تقعْ منافيةً لرواية مَنْ هو أوثَقُ ممن لم يَذْكُرْ تلكَ الزيادةَ > > "And the ziyadah (addition) of their narrator, that is, the narrator of the sahih and the hasan, is accepted, as long as it does not oppose the narration of one who is more trustworthy than those who did not mention that addition." > > (Ibn Hajar, *Nuzhat al-Nazar fee Tawdih Nukhbat al-Fikar*, ed. Itr, [p. 68](https://app.turath.io/book/1565?page=64)) Before the three kinds, try them on a balance. The left pan holds the version of the other narrators, the right pan the version of the one thiqah who adds something, and the added part is the small lit block. Choose a kind below the balance to see whether the two are weighed, and press a pan or the block to read what it is. [[WIDGET:mh-ziyadah]] ### 1) In opposition to the thiqaat or the awthaq **Ziyadah of a thiqah which is in opposition to thiqaat (many thiqah narrators) or an awthaq (more trustworthy) narrator.** Ruling: **this ziyadah is rejected.** Based on this, the wording of the thiqaat (many thiqah narrators) or the awthaq (more trustworthy) narrator will be called **mahfooz**, and the narration of the thiqah narrator (who opposed) will be called **shaadh**. (*Min Atyab al-Minah fi Ilm al-Mustalah*, p. 29) - **Mahfooz:** a report narrated by thiqaat (many thiqah narrators) or an awthaq (more trustworthy) narrator which is in opposition to a thiqah narrator. - **Shaadh:** a report narrated by a thiqah narrator which is in opposition to what is narrated by thiqaat (many thiqah narrators) or an awthaq (more trustworthy) narrator. (*Min Atyab al-Minah fi Ilm al-Mustalah*, p. 29) **Example in the sanad:** > عَنْ أَبِي سَعِيدٍ الخُدْرِيِّ قَالَ: قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ ﷺ: «الأَرْضُ كُلُّهَا مَسْجِدٌ إِلَّا المَقْبَرَةَ وَالحَمَّامَ» > > Abu Sa'id al-Khudri reported: The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said, "The entire earth has been made a place of prayer, except for graveyards and washrooms." > > ([Jami al-Tirmidhi 317, ed. Shakir, 2/131](https://app.turath.io/book/1435?page=560)) This hadith is reported by Hammad bin Salamah from Amr bin Yahya, from his father, and his father from Abu Sa'id al-Khudri, in mawsool and marfoo form. But Sufyan al-Thawri narrated it from Amr bin Yahya, from his father, and his father from the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ), in mursal form. Sufyan al-Thawri is more thiqah than Hammad bin Salamah; that is why Imam al-Daraqutni narrated it in *Al-Ilal* and said this hadith is mahfooz in mursal form. (*Min Atyab al-Minah fi Ilm al-Mustalah*, p. 29; al-Daraqutni, *Al-Ilal al-Waridah fi al-Ahadith al-Nabawiyyah*, [11/321](https://app.turath.io/book/9082?page=4061)) **Point of benefit:** this shaadh (weak) report is declared sahih in marfoo form by Ibn Hazm, Ibn Taymiyyah, al-Albani and Zubair Ali Zai, although scholars of ilal like al-Tirmidhi, al-Daraqutni and others weakened it in marfoo form. Even later scholars like al-Bayhaqi, al-Nawawi and Ibn Abd al-Barr have weakened it in marfoo form. ### 2) Not in opposition to the thiqaat or the awthaq **Ziyadah of a thiqah which is not in opposition to thiqaat (many thiqah narrators) or an awthaq (more trustworthy) narrator.** Ruling: **this ziyadah is accepted**, because it is like extra information that the thiqah is alone in narrating from his teacher. (*Min Atyab al-Minah fi Ilm al-Mustalah*, p. 30) **Example:** Abu Hurayrah reported: The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said: > طَهُورُ إِنَاءِ أَحَدِكُمْ، إِذَا وَلَغَ الْكَلْبُ فِيهِ، أَنْ يَغْسِلَهُ سَبْعَ مَرَّاتٍ > > "The purification of the utensil belonging to one amongst you, after it is licked by a dog, lies in washing it seven times." > > ([Sahih Muslim 279 (92), 1/234](https://app.turath.io/book/1727?page=595)) The same text is reported by Imam Muslim, and al-Nasa'i reported it, with the chain of عَلِيُّ بْنُ مُسْهِرٍ، عَنِ الْأَعْمَشِ، عَنْ أَبِي رَزِينٍ، وَأَبِي صَالِحٍ، عَنْ أَبِي هُرَيْرَةَ (Ali bin Mushir, from al-A'mash, from Abu Razin and Abu Salih, from Abu Hurayrah): > إِذَا وَلَغَ الْكَلْبُ فِي إِنَاءِ أَحَدِكُمْ فَلْيُرِقْهُ. ثُمَّ لِيَغْسِلْهُ سَبْعَ مِرَارٍ > > "If a dog licks the vessel of any one of you, let him throw (the contents) away and wash it seven times." > > ([Sahih Muslim 279 (89), 1/234](https://app.turath.io/book/1727?page=591); [Sunan al-Nasa'i 66, 1/53](https://app.turath.io/book/829?page=123)) Ali bin Mushir is alone from the students of al-A'mash who narrated this extra wording, "let him throw (the contents) away", and he is thiqah. As a result, this ziyadah will be accepted, as it is extra information by a thiqah, which is like a unique report from a thiqah. (*Min Atyab al-Minah fi Ilm al-Mustalah*, p. 30) ### 3) Mutlaq into muqayyad **Ziyadah of a thiqah which is in opposition to thiqaat (many thiqah narrators) or an awthaq (more trustworthy) narrator in a sense that he makes khaas from aam and muqayyad from mutlaq.** Ruling: **according to the correct opinion, this is acceptable.** (*Min Atyab al-Minah fi Ilm al-Mustalah*, p. 30) **Example:** > طَهُورُ إِنَاءِ أَحَدِكُمْ، إِذَا وَلَغَ فِيهِ الْكَلْبُ، أَنْ يَغْسِلَهُ سَبْعَ مَرَّاتٍ. أُولَاهُنَّ بِالتُّرَابِ > > The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said: "The purification of the utensil belonging to any one of you, after it is licked by a dog, lies in washing it seven times, using sand for the first time." > > ([Sahih Muslim 279 (91), 1/234](https://app.turath.io/book/1727?page=594)) When Imam Muslim narrates this from Abu Hurayrah via the route of Muhammad bin Sirin, there is an extra wording, **using sand for the first time**. This is not narrated by other thiqaat. Thus, the extra wording أُولَاهُنَّ بِالتُّرَابِ, using sand for the first time, makes the mutlaq into muqayyad. (*Min Atyab al-Minah fi Ilm al-Mustalah*, p. 30) Al-Tirmidhi's own words on a ziyadah, at the end of his Jami: > وَرُبَّ حَدِيثٍ إِنَّمَا يُسْتَغْرَبُ لِزِيَادَةٍ تَكُونُ فِي الْحَدِيثِ، وَإِنَّمَا تَصِحُّ إِذَا كَانَتِ الزِّيَادَةُ مِمَّنْ يُعْتَمَدُ عَلَى حِفْظِهِ … فَإِذَا زَادَ حَافِظٌ مِمَّنْ يُعْتَمَدُ عَلَى حِفْظِهِ قُبِلَ ذَلِكَ مِنْهُ. > > "And many a hadith is only called ghareeb because of a ziyadah in it, and it is only sound when the ziyadah is from one whose memory is relied upon … So when a haafiz whose memory is relied upon adds something, that is accepted from him." > > (al-Tirmidhi, *Al-Ilal al-Saghir*, at the end of Jami al-Tirmidhi, ed. Bashar, [6/252–253](https://app.turath.io/book/642?page=75)) So in essence: - A ziyadah that opposes the thiqaat or the awthaq is rejected: theirs is mahfooz, and his is shaadh. - A ziyadah that does not oppose them is accepted, and so is one that only makes the mutlaq muqayyad, according to the correct opinion. :::pause - What is a shaadh report? A report narrated by a thiqah narrator which is in opposition to what is narrated by thiqaat (many thiqah narrators) or an awthaq (more trustworthy) narrator. - In the hadith "The entire earth is a place of prayer…", why is the mursal form called mahfooz? Because Sufyan al-Thawri, who narrated it in mursal form, is more thiqah than Hammad bin Salamah. Al-Daraqutni said it is mahfooz in mursal form. - Why is Ali bin Mushir's "let him throw (the contents) away" accepted? It does not oppose the thiqaat: it is extra information by a thiqah, which is like a unique report from a thiqah. ::: --- ## Weighed case by case: the qaraain **Points of benefit:** Ziyadah of a thiqah is accepted or rejected based on **qaraain** according to the specialist scholars of ilal. Ibn Hajar said in *Nuzhat al-Nazar*: it is narrated from the scholars of hadith from the mutaqaddimeen, like Abdurrahman bin Mahdi, Yahya al-Qattan, Ahmad bin Hanbal, Yahya bin Ma'een, Ali bin al-Madini, al-Bukhari, Abu Hatim al-Razi, al-Nasa'i, al-Daraqutni and others, that ziyadah is based on **tarjeeh**. It is not known from anyone of them that they accepted ziyadah mutlaqan (absolutely). (Ibn Hajar, *Nuzhat al-Nazar fee Tawdih Nukhbat al-Fikar*, ed. Itr, [pp. 69–70](https://app.turath.io/book/1565?page=66)) Ibn Hajar says about the methodology of Imam al-Bukhari and Muslim: "Giving precedence to the mawsul over the mursal was not the absolute principle followed by al-Bukhari and Muslim; rather it is based on qaraain. When the qareenah is to prefer the mawsul, they would rely on the mawsul." (Ibn Hajar, *Fath al-Bari Sharh Sahih al-Bukhari*, [10/203](https://app.turath.io/book/1673?page=5964)) Hafidh al-Ala'i said: "What is apparent from the statements of the specialist scholars from the mutaqaddimeen, like Abdurrahman bin Mahdi, Yahya al-Qattan, Ahmad bin Hanbal, al-Bukhari and their likes, is that there is no universal principle with regards to ziyadah of thiqah; rather it is based on tarjeeh. If there is any qareenah to support (or reject the ziyadah), they would rule accordingly." (Ibn Hajar, *An-Nukat ala Kitab Ibn al-Salah*, [2/604](https://app.turath.io/book/8316?page=578)) Ibn Daqiq al-Eid said: "I don't know any absolute principle in the acceptance or rejection of ziyadah of thiqah." (Ibn Daqiq al-Eid, *Sharh al-Ilmam bi-Ahadith al-Ahkam*, [1/27–28](https://app.turath.io/book/18100?page=130)) This was also mentioned by Dr Maher Yasin al-Fahl in *Al-Jami fi al-Ilal*. (Maher Yasin al-Fahl, *Al-Jami fi al-Ilal wa al-Fawaid*, [2/117](https://app.turath.io/book/1526?page=631)) **What are those qaraain?** Ibn Hajar said: the qaraain are many, and it is not possible to enlist them as such. It depends on the individual hadith, and there is no specific principle as such. (Ibn Hajar, *An-Nukat ala Kitab Ibn al-Salah*, [2/712](https://app.turath.io/book/8316?page=686)) Shaykh Nadir bin al-Sanusi has enlisted some of them in his book قرائن الترجيح في المحفوظ والشاذ وفي زيادة الثقة. :::pause - According to the specialist scholars of ilal, what is the ziyadah of a thiqah accepted or rejected on? On qaraain. Ibn Hajar said it is narrated from the mutaqaddimeen that ziyadah is based on tarjeeh, and it is not known from any of them that they accepted it absolutely. - Can the qaraain be listed? Ibn Hajar said they are many and it is not possible to enlist them: it depends on the individual hadith, and there is no specific principle. ::: --- ## Those who accepted it absolutely **Evidences quoted by scholars who accepted ziyadah of thiqah mutlaqan (absolutely):** **1. Imam al-Shafi'i** said, as recorded by Ibn Abi Hatim with an authentic isnad in *Adab al-Shafi'i*: "Verily shaadh is that in which a thiqah narrator narrates a hadith with one wording, then another thiqah narrator (less trustworthy) narrates in opposition to his narration; then it is said that he has done shudhoodh in his narration." (Ibn Abi Hatim, *Adab al-Shafi'i wa Manaqibuh*, [p. 179](https://app.turath.io/book/1485?page=158)) In the same book he said: "Shaadh, in hadith, is not what a thiqah narrator narrates which is not narrated by anyone else. The shaadh hadith is that in which a thiqah narrator narrates a hadith and one of the men among them does shudhoodh in it, thus he opposes him." (Ibn Abi Hatim, *Adab al-Shafi'i wa Manaqibuh*, [pp. 178–179](https://app.turath.io/book/1485?page=157)) Based on this, some scholars have said that Imam al-Shafi'i accepts ziyadah al-thiqah mutlaqan, if it doesn't contradict the text. **Understanding the statement of al-Shafi'i quoted above:** Imam al-Shafi'i says in *Al-Risalah*, whilst discussing the mursal hadith: "And if the one who does irsaal (the thiqah narrator who is reporting mursal) is with the huffadh in the narration of a hadith, then he should not oppose (the huffadh) in the narration of that hadith. And if he opposes, then his wording should be less than that of (the huffadh, and not more). In such a case, the evidence is that the source of his hadith is sahih. And when the one who is narrating mursal (the thiqah) opposes what we have mentioned above (meaning he adds more words than those of the huffadh), this thing is harmful to his hadith." (al-Shafi'i, *Al-Risalah*, ed. Ahmad Shakir, paras. 1272–1273, [pp. 463–464](https://app.turath.io/book/8180?page=548)) > ويكون إذا شَرِك أحدًا من الحفاظ في حديث لم يخالفه فإن خالفه وُجد حديثه أنقصَ كانت في هذه دلائل على صحة مخرج حديثه … ومتى ما خالف ما وصفت أضرَّ بحديثه > > "And when he shares a hadith with one of the huffadh, he does not oppose him; and if he opposes him, his hadith is found to be less: in this are indications of the soundness of the source of his hadith … And whenever he opposes what I have described, it harms his hadith." > > (al-Shafi'i, *Al-Risalah*, ed. Ahmad Shakir, paras. 1272–1273, [p. 463](https://app.turath.io/book/8180?page=548) and [p. 464](https://app.turath.io/book/8180?page=549)) Imam Ibn Abd al-Hadi comments on the above statement of al-Shafi'i in *Al-Sarim al-Munki*: "This is a proof from Imam al-Shafi'i (may Allah have mercy on him) that ziyadah al-thiqah is not acceptable according to al-Shafi'i mutlaqan, as many of his followers from the fuqaha and others say." (Ibn Abd al-Hadi, *Al-Sarim al-Munki fi al-Radd ala al-Subki*, [p. 109](https://app.turath.io/book/8622?page=105)) Thus, even al-Shafi'i looks for qaraain when accepting the ziyadah of al-thiqah. He also rejected one ziyadah, as the qaraain did not support its acceptance according to him, in *Kitab al-Umm*. **2. Imam al-Hakim** said in *Al-Mustadrak*: "According to the fuqaha of the people of Islam, the condition of a sahih is that the ziyadah of a thiqah is maqbool in asaneed and mutoon." (al-Hakim, *Al-Mustadrak ala al-Sahihayn*, [1/165](https://app.turath.io/book/1200?page=155)) **Understanding the statement of al-Hakim:** al-Hakim said that ziyadah al-thiqah is accepted according to the fuqaha. As for his own methodology, he used to accept or reject it based on qaraain like the other muhadditheen; he rejected the ziyadah of a thiqah based on qaraain in his book *Ma'rifat Uloom al-Hadith*. (al-Hakim, *Ma'rifat Uloom al-Hadith*, [p. 58](https://app.turath.io/book/13179?page=108)) Imam Muhammad Gondalwi said in *Khayr al-Kalam*, commenting on al-Hakim: "Thus we know that al-Hakim did not accept ziyadah in every case." **3. Ibn Hazm al-Andalusi** said in *Al-Ihkam fi Usul al-Ahkam*, under "Fasl fee Ziyadat al-Adl": "If a trustworthy narrator narrates a ziyadah on the narrations of other narrators, whether he is munfarid (alone) in this ziyadah or another person has supported him, a narrator similar to him or lower in level than him, then it is obligatory to accept that ziyadah." (Ibn Hazm, *Al-Ihkam fi Usul al-Ahkam*, [2/90](https://app.turath.io/book/10432?page=237)) **Comment:** as for Ibn Hazm, he accepts ziyadah of thiqah mutlaqan, as he was usooli and mentioned it in *Al-Ihkam fi Usul al-Ahkam*, which is a book on usul al-fiqh. **4. Imam al-Khatib al-Baghdadi** said in *Al-Kifayah fee Ilm al-Riwayah*: "The majority of the fuqaha and ashab al-hadith hold that the ziyadah of a thiqah is acceptable, where he is the sole narrator narrating it." (al-Khatib al-Baghdadi, *Al-Kifayah fi Ilm al-Riwayah*, [p. 424](https://app.turath.io/book/13055?page=1519)) Al-Khatib al-Baghdadi himself did not accept ziyadah of thiqah mutlaqan, and rejected it at times based on qaraain, and Ibn al-Salah pointed out about his statements that those statements are true with regards to the fuqaha. **The ziyadah of a sudooq or hasan al-hadith narrator is rejected.** Ibn Hajar said: the ziyadah of a sudooq narrator is not accepted. (Ibn Hajar, *An-Nukat ala Kitab Ibn al-Salah*, [2/690](https://app.turath.io/book/8316?page=664)) **Summary:** in general, ziyadah of thiqah is accepted, except if: 1. It is in opposition to the thiqaat or the awthaq. 2. There is clear jarh of that ziyadah from the scholars of ilal from the mutaqaddimeen. 3. It is the ziyadah of a sudooq, as it is rejected. 4. There are clear evidences and qaraain to show that the ziyadah is not preserved and is a mistake from the narrator. :::pause - Why did some scholars say that al-Shafi'i accepts ziyadah al-thiqah mutlaqan? Because of his words recorded by Ibn Abi Hatim: shaadh is not what a thiqah narrates that no one else narrates; shaadh is where a thiqah narrates and another opposes him. - What did Ibn Abd al-Hadi say about al-Shafi'i's statement in Al-Risalah? That it is a proof from Imam al-Shafi'i that ziyadah al-thiqah is not acceptable according to him mutlaqan, as many of his followers from the fuqaha and others say. - Name two cases in which the ziyadah of a thiqah is not accepted. When it is in opposition to the thiqaat or the awthaq; when there is clear jarh of it from the scholars of ilal from the mutaqaddimeen; when it is the ziyadah of a sudooq; or when there are clear evidences and qaraain that it is not preserved. ::: --- ## Case study: the moving finger Now we put all of this to work on one hadith: the hadith on moving the finger. Here is its chain. Asim bin Kulayb narrated it from his father, from Wail bin Hujr al-Hadrami. From Asim bin Kulayb, his students narrated it in two ways: ([Sahih Ibn Khuzaymah 714, 1/354](https://app.turath.io/book/1446?page=1167)) - أَشَارَ بِالسَّبَّابَةِ, "he pointed with the index finger": Shu'bah bin Hajjaj, Sufyan al-Thawri, Sufyan bin Uyaynah, Bishr bin al-Mufaddal, Abu Awanah, Abu al-Ahwas, Zuhair bin Muawiyah, Musa bin Kathir, Khalid bin Abdullah al-Tahhan and Abdul Wahid bin Ziyad. - يُحَرِّكُهَا, "moving it": Zaidah bin Qudamah. Alongside these, there are 81 more authentic isnaad from the Sahaba, like Abdullah bin al-Zubair, Abdullah bin Umar, Abu Humayd al-Sa'idi, Abu Hurayrah, Sa'd bin Abi Waqqas and others. The narration لَا يُحَرِّكُهَا, "he did not move it", ([Sunan Abi Dawud 989, 1/260](https://app.turath.io/book/1726?page=1326)) was authenticated by al-Nawawi and al-Bayhaqi, and weakened by al-Albani, Zubair Ali Zai and others. From the contemporary scholars, those who authenticated the hadith on the moving finger include al-Albani, his students like Ali al-Halabi, Zubair Ali Zai, Abu Ishaq al-Huwayni and others. Those who weakened it include Shaykh Muqbil bin Hadi, Bakr Abu Zayd, Mustafa al-Adawi and others. ### The arguments of Shaykh al-Albani **The arguments of Shaykh al-Albani in defence of this hadith:** Shaykh al-Albani criticised those who weakened this narration in his *Tamam al-Minnah*. His main arguments are: **1) The ulama have authenticated this hadith even with يحركها in it,** and no one has said it is da'if or shaadh. Even those scholars who did not follow this narration, like al-Nawawi and al-Bayhaqi, accepted its authenticity. **Answer:** - a) The scholars whom Shaykh al-Albani has quoted also authenticated the narration لا يحركها. It can be said, "The ulama have authenticated this hadith even with لا يحركها in it", but Shaykh al-Albani weakens it. So this argument is not strong. - b) Imam Ibn Khuzaymah indicated towards its weakness in his Sahih by saying: "There is nothing in the reports that mention يحركها except for this report from Zaidah." ([Sahih Ibn Khuzaymah 714, 1/354](https://app.turath.io/book/1446?page=1167)) - c) No one from the scholars of the mutaqaddimeen authenticated the wording يحركها. - d) It is against the usool of Shaykh al-Albani to say "no one has weakened it", because according to the Shaykh, what matters is proof. In the works of the Shaykh, you will find numerous positions where he differed with the positions of the scholars who came before him, by providing new research with proofs. **2) The ziyadah of يحركها is not in contradiction to the other ahadith.** Even with the tafarrud of Zaidah, it is not shaadh. In the narrations of the thiqaat, though there is no يحركها, there is also no negation of it, because أشار بالسبابة can include both movement and non-movement. For example: a person wants to invite someone who is standing far away, indicating with his hand or fingers, or he is asking people who are standing to sit down; no one will understand that it is without movement of the fingers. **Answer:** - a) Firstly, يحركها is not a ziyadah of thiqah; rather, this word was replaced instead of أشار بالسبابة. The point is: what exactly did Asim bin Kulayb tell his students? Eleven students, including expert huffadh like Shu'bah and the two Sufyans, narrated أشار بالسبابة, and only one, who is not great in hifdh like the huffadh above, narrated other words. Also, what exactly did Wail bin Hujr say? Eleven narrators of the same teacher, as well as numerous other authentic routes, say أشار بالسبابة, and only one says يحركها. So what wording did Wail bin Hujr use? If both routes were authentic, then reconciliation would be easy based on the above examples. - b) Secondly, every isharah does not necessitate movement. For example, there is a group of people standing and you want to invite only one; your voice did not reach them clearly and they thought you were inviting all, but you point out only one finger. You do not move it. These examples are not necessary, and are irrelevant. Allah knows best. :::pause - In the case study, who alone narrated يحركها from Asim bin Kulayb? Zaidah bin Qudamah. The other students, like Shu'bah and the two Sufyans, narrated أشار بالسبابة. - What did Ibn Khuzaymah say in his Sahih about يحركها? There is nothing in the reports that mention يحركها except for this report from Zaidah. - What is the answer to the argument that ishaarah can include movement? Every isharah does not necessitate movement: you can point out only one finger to invite one person from a group, and not move it. ::: --- ## Check what you have learned Eight questions, taken only from what you just read. Every answer comes with the line that explains it. [[WIDGET:mh-quiz-5]] --- ## Conclusion We read al-Tirmidhi's combined words. When he says "hasan sahih" about a ghareeb hadith, the original wording is "hasan or sahih"; when the hadith has two chains, it is "hasan and sahih". Ibn Hajar answered that his terminology of hasan is restricted to what he calls only "hasan", so there is no conflict in "hasan ghareeb". Then the ziyadah of a thiqah: rejected when it opposes the thiqaat or the awthaq, where theirs is mahfooz and his is shaadh; accepted when it does not oppose them, and when it only makes the mutlaq muqayyad, according to the correct opinion. The specialist scholars of ilal weigh each ziyadah by its qaraain. One thing to keep: Ali bin Mushir was alone from the students of al-A'mash in narrating "let him throw (the contents) away", and his ziyadah is accepted, as it is extra information by a thiqah, which is like a unique report from a thiqah. InshaAllah, in the next part we come to the khabar al-ma'roof, the khabar al-munkar and al-mutaba'ah. --- ## Sources This lesson follows the course book. Each quotation and report is cited where it appears, and the original works it was checked against are listed here. - *Min Atyab al-Minah fi Ilm al-Mustalah*, Shaykh Abdul Muhsin Al-Abbad and Shaykh Abdul Kareem al-Murad, pp. 25–30 (the printed course book). - Jami al-Tirmidhi, edited by Ahmad Shakir: [22 (1/34)](https://app.turath.io/book/1435?page=43), [317 (2/131)](https://app.turath.io/book/1435?page=560); and *Al-Ilal al-Saghir* at the end of the Jami, edited by Bashar Awwad Ma'ruf, [6/227](https://app.turath.io/book/642?page=1), [6/251](https://app.turath.io/book/642?page=74), [6/251–253](https://app.turath.io/book/642?page=75). - Sahih al-Bukhari, al-Sultaniyyah edition: [887 (2/4)](https://app.turath.io/book/1681?page=1448). - Sahih Muslim, edited by Muhammad Fuad Abdul Baqi: [252 (1/220)](https://app.turath.io/book/1727?page=535), [279 (1/234)](https://app.turath.io/book/1727?page=591), [279 (91)](https://app.turath.io/book/1727?page=594), [279 (92)](https://app.turath.io/book/1727?page=595). - Sunan al-Nasa'i, [66 (1/53)](https://app.turath.io/book/829?page=123). Sunan Abi Dawud, edited by Muhyi al-Din Abd al-Hamid, [989 (1/260)](https://app.turath.io/book/1726?page=1326). Sahih Ibn Khuzaymah, [714 (1/354)](https://app.turath.io/book/1446?page=1167). - Ibn Hajar, *Nuzhat al-Nazar fee Tawdih Nukhbat al-Fikar*, edited by Nur al-Din Itr, [pp. 66–68](https://app.turath.io/book/1565?page=62) and [pp. 68–70](https://app.turath.io/book/1565?page=64). - Ibn Hajar, *An-Nukat ala Kitab Ibn al-Salah*, [2/604](https://app.turath.io/book/8316?page=578), [2/690](https://app.turath.io/book/8316?page=664), [2/712](https://app.turath.io/book/8316?page=686). - Ibn Hajar, *Fath al-Bari Sharh Sahih al-Bukhari*, [10/203](https://app.turath.io/book/1673?page=5964). - Ibn al-Salah, *Muqaddimah* (Ma'rifat Anwa Uloom al-Hadith), edited by Nur al-Din Itr, [p. 86](https://app.turath.io/book/22870?page=83). - Ibn Taymiyyah, *Majmu al-Fatawa*, [18/24](https://app.turath.io/book/7289?page=9160). - Ibn Daqiq al-Eid, *Sharh al-Ilmam bi-Ahadith al-Ahkam*, [1/27–28](https://app.turath.io/book/18100?page=130). - al-Daraqutni, *Al-Ilal al-Waridah fi al-Ahadith al-Nabawiyyah*, [11/321](https://app.turath.io/book/9082?page=4061). - Ibn Abi Hatim, *Adab al-Shafi'i wa Manaqibuh*, [pp. 178–179](https://app.turath.io/book/1485?page=157). - al-Shafi'i, *Al-Risalah*, edited by Ahmad Shakir, [pp. 463–464](https://app.turath.io/book/8180?page=548). - Ibn Abd al-Hadi, *Al-Sarim al-Munki fi al-Radd ala al-Subki*, [p. 109](https://app.turath.io/book/8622?page=105). - al-Hakim, *Al-Mustadrak ala al-Sahihayn*, al-Minhaj edition, [1/165](https://app.turath.io/book/1200?page=155); *Ma'rifat Uloom al-Hadith*, [p. 58](https://app.turath.io/book/13179?page=108). - Ibn Hazm, *Al-Ihkam fi Usul al-Ahkam*, [2/90](https://app.turath.io/book/10432?page=237). - al-Khatib al-Baghdadi, *Al-Kifayah fi Ilm al-Riwayah*, [p. 424](https://app.turath.io/book/13055?page=1519). - Maher Yasin al-Fahl, *Al-Jami fi al-Ilal wa al-Fawaid*, [2/117](https://app.turath.io/book/1526?page=631).