Shāh Walī Allāh al-Dihlawī (d. 1176 AH) and his classification of the books of Hadith
The famous Indian Hadith scholar known as Shāh Walī Allāh al-Dihlawī mentioned the following in his Ḥujjat Allāh al-Bāligha (1/230-234):
(بَاب طَبَقَات كتب الحَدِيث)
(Chapter: Classifications of Hadith Books)
اعْلَم أَنه لَا سَبِيل لنا إِلَى معرفَة الشَّرَائِع وَالْأَحْكَام إِلَّا خبر النَّبِي ﷺ بِخِلَاف الْمصَالح، فَإِنَّهَا قد تدْرك بالتجربة وَالنَّظَر الصَّادِق والحدس وَنَحْو ذَلِك، وَلَا سَبِيل لنا إِلَى معرفَة أخباره ﷺ إِلَّا تلقي الرِّوَايَات المنتهية إِلَيْهِ بالاتصال والعنعنة سَوَاء كَانَت من لَفظه ﷺ، أَو كَانَت أَحَادِيث مَوْقُوفَة قد صحت الرِّوَايَة بهَا عَن جمَاعَة من الصَّحَابَة وَالتَّابِعِينَ بِحَيْثُ يبعد إقدامهم على الْجَزْم بِمثلِهِ لَوْلَا النَّص أَو الاشارة من الشَّارِع، فَمثل ذَلِك رِوَايَة عَنهُ ﷺ دلَالَة، وتلقي تِلْكَ الرِّوَايَات لَا سَبِيل إِلَيْهِ فِي يَوْمنَا هَذَا إِلَّا تتبع الْكتب الْمُدَوَّنَة فِي علم الحَدِيث، فَإِنَّهُ لَا يُوجد الْيَوْم رِوَايَة يعْتَمد عَلَيْهَا غير مدونة، وَكتب الحَدِيث على طَبَقَات مُخْتَلفَة ومنازل متباينة فَوَجَبَ الاعتناء بِمَعْرِفَة طَبَقَات كتب الحَدِيث.
Know that there is no way for us to know the religious laws [sharā’iʿ] and legal rulings [aḥkām] except through the reports of the Prophet ﷺ, unlike benefits [maṣāliḥ], for they may be comprehended through experience, sound reasoning, intuition, and the like. And there is no way for us to know his reports ﷺ except by receiving the narrations [riwāyāt] that reach him through connection [ittiṣāl] and chain transmission [ʿanʿana], whether they were from his words ﷺ, or they were halted hadith [aḥādīth mawqūfa] whose narration has been authenticated from a group of Companions [ṣaḥāba] and Followers [tābiʿīn] such that it would be unlikely for them to venture to assert the like of it without a text [naṣṣ] or indication [ishāra] from the Lawgiver [shāriʿ]. Such a thing is a narration from him ﷺ by indication [dalāla]. The receiving of those narrations has no path to it in our day except by following the books compiled in the science of hadith, for there is no narration found today that is relied upon that is not compiled. And the books of hadith are in different classifications [ṭabaqāt] and varying ranks [manāzil], so it became necessary to pay attention to knowing the classifications of hadith books.
فَتَقول هِيَ بِاعْتِبَار الصِّحَّة والشهرة على أَربع طَبَقَات: وَذَلِكَ لِأَن أَعلَى أَقسَام الحَدِيث – كَمَا عرفت فِيمَا سبق – مَا ثَبت بالتواتر، وأجمعت الْأمة على قبُوله الْعَمَل بِهِ، … ثمَّ مَا استفاض من طرق مُتعَدِّدَة لَا يبْقى مَعهَا شُبْهَة يعْتد بهَا، وَاتفقَ على الْعَمَل بِهِ جُمْهُور فُقَهَاء الْأَمْصَار، أَو لم يخْتَلف فِيهِ عُلَمَاء الْحَرَمَيْنِ خَاصَّة، فَإِن الْحَرَمَيْنِ مَحل الْخُلَفَاء الرَّاشِدين فِي الْقُرُون الأولى ومحط رحال الْعلمَاء طبقَة بعد طبقَة يبعد أَن يسلمُوا مِنْهُم الْخَطَأ الظَّاهِر، أَو كَانَ قولا مَشْهُورا مَعْمُولا بِهِ فِي قطر عَظِيم مرويا عَن جمَاعَة عَظِيمَة من الصَّحَابَة وَالتَّابِعِينَ، ثمَّ مَا صَحَّ، أَو حسن سَنَده، وَشهد بِهِ عُلَمَاء الحَدِيث، وَلم يكن قولا متروكا لم يذهب إِلَيْهِ أحد من الْأمة، أما مَا كَانَ ضَعِيفا مَوْضُوعا أَو مُنْقَطِعًا أَو مقلوبا فِي سَنَده أَو مَتنه أَو من رِوَايَة المجاهيل أَو مُخَالفا لما أجمع عَلَيْهِ السّلف طبقَة بعد طبقَة، فَلَا سَبِيل إِلَى القَوْل بِهِ، …، فالصحة أَن يشْتَرط مؤلف الْكتاب على نَفسه إِيرَاد مَا صَحَّ أَو حسن غير مقلوب وَلَا شَاذ وَلَا ضَعِيف إِلَّا مَعَ بَيَان حَاله، فَإِن إِيرَاد الضَّعِيف مَعَ بَيَان حَاله لَا يقْدَح فِي الْكتاب.
You say they are, considering authenticity [ṣiḥḥa] and fame [shuhra], in four classifications [ṭabaqāt]: That is because the highest categories of hadith – as you know from what preceded – is what is established by continuous transmission [tawātur], and the community [umma] has unanimously agreed to accept it and act upon it… Then what has spread through multiple paths such that no doubt remains with it that is to be considered, and the majority of jurists [fuqahā’] of the cities [amṣār] have agreed to act upon it, or the scholars of the Two Holy Sanctuaries [Ḥaramayn] specifically did not differ regarding it, for the Two Holy Sanctuaries were the seat of the Rightly-Guided Caliphs [khulafā’ rāshidīn] in the early centuries and the destination of scholars generation after generation – it is unlikely that manifest error would escape them – or it was a famous saying acted upon in a great region, narrated from a great group of Companions and Followers. Then what was authentic [ṣaḥḥa] or good [ḥasan] in its chain [sanad], and the hadith scholars testified to it, and it was not an abandoned saying that no one from the community adopted. As for what was weak [ḍaʿīf], fabricated [mawḍūʿ], disconnected [munqaṭiʿ], or inverted [maqlūb] in its chain (sanad) or text [matn], or from the narration of unknown persons [majāhīl], or contrary to what the predecessors [salaf] unanimously agreed upon generation after generation, there is no way to accept it… Authenticity [ṣiḥḥa] is that the author of the book stipulates upon himself to mention what is authentic or good, not inverted [maqlūb], anomalous [shādhdh], or weak [ḍaʿīf], except with clarification of its state, for mentioning the weak [ḍaʿīf], with clarification of its state does not harm the book.
والشهرة أَن تكون الْأَحَادِيث الْمَذْكُورَة فِيهَا دَائِرَة على أَلْسِنَة الْمُحدثين قبل تدوينها وَبعد تدوينها، فَيكون أَئِمَّة الحَدِيث قبل الْمُؤلف رووها بطرق شَتَّى، وأوردوها فِي مسانيدهم ومجاميعهم، وَبعد الْمُؤلف اشتغلوا بِرِوَايَة الْكتاب وَحفظه وكشف مشكله وَشرح غَرِيبه وَبَيَان إعرابه وَتَخْرِيج طرق أَحَادِيثه واستنباط فقهها والفحص عَن أَحْوَال رواتها طبقَة بعد طبقَة إِلَى يَوْمنَا هَذَا حَتَّى لَا يبْقى شَيْء مِمَّا يتَعَلَّق بِهِ غير مبحوث عَنهُ إِلَّا مَا شَاءَ الله، وَيكون نقاد الحَدِيث قبل المُصَنّف وَبعده وافقوه فِي القَوْل بهَا، وحكموا بِصِحَّتِهَا، وارتضوا رَأْي المُصَنّف فِيهَا، وتلقوا كِتَابه بالمدح وَالثنَاء، وَيكون أَئِمَّة الْفِقْه لَا يزالون يستنبطون عَنْهَا، ويعتمدون عَلَيْهَا، ويعتنون بهَا، وَيكون الْعَامَّة لَا يخلون عَن اعتقادها وتعظيمها.
And fame [shuhra] is that the hadith mentioned in it be circulating on the tongues of the hadith scholars [muḥaddithīn] before their compilation and after their compilation, so that the Imams of hadith before the author narrated them through various paths and included them in their collections [masānīd] and compilations [majāmiʿ], and after the author they engaged in narrating the book, memorizing it, uncovering its difficulties, explaining its rare terms [gharīb], clarifying its grammar [iʿrāb], extracting the paths of its hadith, deriving its jurisprudence [fiqh], and investigating the conditions of its narrators generation after generation until our day, such that nothing remains related to it that has not been researched except what Allah wills. And the hadith critics [nuqqād al-ḥadīth] before the compiler and after him agreed with him in accepting them, ruled on their authenticity, approved the compiler’s opinion regarding them, and received his book with praise and commendation. And the Imams of jurisprudence (fiqh) continue to derive from them, rely upon them, and care for them, and the common people [ʿāmma] do not cease from believing in them and venerating them.
وَبِالْجُمْلَةِ فَإِذا اجْتمعت هَاتَانِ الخصلتان كملا فِي كتاب كَانَ من الطَّبَقَة الأولى ثمَّ وَثمّ، وَإِن فقدتا رَأْسا لم يكن لَهُ اعْتِبَار، وَمَا كَانَ أَعلَى حد فِي الطَّبَقَة الأولى فَإِنَّهُ يصل حد التَّوَاتُر، وَمَا دون ذَلِك يصل إِلَى الاستفاضة، ثمَّ إِلَى الصِّحَّة القطعية أَعنِي الْقطع الْمَأْخُوذ فِي علم الحَدِيث الْمُفِيد للْعَمَل، والطبقة الثَّانِيَة إِلَى الاستفاضة أَو الصِّحَّة القطعية أَو الظنية وَهَكَذَا ينزل الْأَمر.
In summary, when these two qualities are completely gathered in a book, it is from the first classification and so on, and if they are entirely absent, it has no consideration. What is at the highest level in the first classification reaches the level of continuous transmission [tawātur], and what is below that reaches wide transmission, then to definitive authenticity [ṣiḥḥa qaṭʿiyya] – I mean the certainty [qaṭʿ] taken in the science of hadith that provides benefit for action [ʿamal]. And the second classification reaches wide transmission or definitive or probable authenticity [ṣiḥḥa ẓanniyya], and thus the matter descends.
فالطبقة الأولى منحصرة بالاستقراء فِي ثَلَاثَة كتب، الْمُوَطَّأ، وصحيح البُخَارِيّ، وصحيح مُسلم. قَالَ الشَّافِعِي: أصح الْكتب بعد كتاب الله موطأ مَالك، وَاتفقَ أهل الحَدِيث على أَن جَمِيع مَا فِيهِ صَحِيح على رَأْي مَالك وَمن وَافقه، وَأما على رَأْي غَيره فَلَيْسَ فِيهِ مُرْسل وَلَا مُنْقَطع إِلَّا قد اتَّصل السَّنَد بِهِ من طرق أُخْرَى، فَلَا جرم أَنَّهَا صَحِيحَة من هَذَا الْوَجْه، وَقد صنف فِي زمَان مَالك موطآت كَثِيرَة فِي تَخْرِيج أَحَادِيثه وَوصل منقطعه، مثل كتاب ابْن أبي ذِئْب وَابْن عُيَيْنَة وَالثَّوْري وَمعمر وَغَيرهم مِمَّن شَارك مَالِكًا فِي الشُّيُوخ، وَقد رَوَاهُ عَن مَالك بِغَيْر وَاسِطَة أَكثر من ألف رجل وَقد ضرب النَّاس فِيهِ أكباد الْإِبِل إِلَى مَالك من أقاصي الْبِلَاد كَمَا كَانَ النَّبِي ﷺ ذكره فِي حَدِيثه، فَمنهمْ المبرزون من الْفُقَهَاء كالشافعي وَمُحَمّد بن الْحسن، وَابْن وهب وَابْن الْقَاسِم، وَمِنْهُم نحارير الْمُحدثين كيحيى ابْن سعيد الْقطَّان وَعبد الرَّحْمَن بن مهْدي وَعبد الرَّزَّاق، وَمِنْهُم الْمُلُوك والأمراء كالرشيد وابنيه، وَقد اشْتهر فِي عصره حَتَّى بلغ على جَمِيع ديار الْإِسْلَام، ثمَّ لم يَأْتِ زمَان إِلَّا وَهُوَ أَكثر لَهُ شهرة وَأقوى بِهِ عناية، وَعَلِيهِ بنى فُقَهَاء الْأَمْصَار مذاهبهم حَتَّى أهل الْعرَاق فِي بعض أَمرهم، وَلم يزل الْعلمَاء يخرجُون أَحَادِيثه، ويذكرون متابعاته وشواهده، ويشرحون غَرِيبه، ويضبطون مشكله ويبحثون عَن فقهه، ويفتشون عَن رِجَاله إِلَى غَايَة لَيْسَ بعْدهَا غَايَة. وَإِن شِئْت الْحق الصراح فقس كتاب الْمُوَطَّأ بِكِتَاب الأثار لمُحَمد والأمالي لأبي يُوسُف تَجِد بَينه وَبَينهمَا بعد المشرقين، فَهَل سَمِعت أحدا من الْمُحدثين وَالْفُقَهَاء تعرض لَهما واعتنى بهما؟
The first classification is limited by induction [istiqrā’] to three books: al-Muwaṭṭa’, Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī, and Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim. Al-Shāfiʿī said: “The most authentic book after the Book of Allah is the Muwaṭṭa’ of Mālik.” The people of hadith agreed that everything in it is authentic according to the opinion of Mālik and those who agreed with him. As for the opinion of others, there is nothing in it that is transmitted as mursal[1] or disconnected [munqaṭiʿ] except that the chain has been connected to it through other paths, so undoubtedly, they are authentic from this aspect.
Many Muwaṭṭa’s were compiled in Mālik’s time for extracting its hadith and connecting its disconnected parts, such as the book of Ibn Abī Dhi’b, Ibn ʿUyayna, al-Thawrī, Maʿmar, and others who shared teachers [shuyūkh] with Mālik. More than a thousand men narrated it from Mālik without intermediary, and people struck the livers of camels [travelled long distances] to Mālik from the farthest lands, as the Prophet ﷺ mentioned in his hadith.[2] Among them were outstanding jurists like al-Shāfiʿī, Muḥammad ibn al-Ḥasan, Ibn Wahb, and Ibn al-Qāsim; among them were eminent hadith scholars like Yaḥyā ibn Saʿīd al-Qaṭṭān, ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn Mahdī, and ʿAbd al-Razzāq; and among them were kings and princes like al-Rashīd and his two sons. It became famous in his era until it reached all the lands of Islam [diyār al-Islām], then no time came except that it became more famous and received stronger attention. Upon it the jurists of the cities built their schools [madhāhib], even the people of Iraq in some of their affairs. The scholars continued to extract its hadith, mention its corroborating narrations [mutābaʿāt] and supporting evidence [shawāhid], explain its rare terms, verify its difficult parts, research its jurisprudence, and investigate its narrators to a limit beyond which there is no limit. If you want the clear truth, compare the book al-Muwaṭṭa’ with Kitāb al-Āthār by Muḥammad[3] and al-Amālī by Abū Yūsuf – you will find between it and them the distance between East and West. Have you heard any of the hadith scholars and jurists address them and care for them?
أما الصحيحان فقد اتّفق المحدثون على أَن جَمِيع مَا فيهمَا من الْمُتَّصِل الْمَرْفُوع صَحِيح بِالْقطعِ، وأنهما متواتران إِلَى مصنفيهما، وَأَنه كل من يهون أَمرهمَا فَهُوَ مُبْتَدع مُتبع غير سَبِيل الْمُؤمنِينَ. وَإِن شِئْت الْحق الصراح فقسهما بِكِتَاب ابْن أبي شيبَة وَكتاب الطَّحَاوِيّ ومسند الْخَوَارِزْمِيّ وَغَيرهمَا تَجِد بَينهَا وَبَينهمَا بعد المشرقين وَقد استدرك الْحَاكِم عَلَيْهِمَا أَحَادِيث هِيَ على شَرطهمَا وَلم يذكراها، وَقد تتبعت مَا استدركه، فَوَجَدته قد أصَاب من وَجه، وَلم يصب من وَجه، وَذَلِكَ لِأَنَّهُ وجد أَحَادِيث مروية عَن رجال الشَّيْخَيْنِ بشرطهما فِي الصِّحَّة والاتصال، فاتجه استدراكه عَلَيْهِمَا من هَذَا الْوَجْه، وَلَكِن الشَّيْخَيْنِ لَا يذكران إِلَّا حَدِيثا قد تناظر فِيهِ مشايخهما، وَأَجْمعُوا على القَوْل بِهِ والتصحيح لَهُ، كَمَا أَشَارَ مُسلم حَيْثُ قَالَ: لم أذكر هَهُنَا إِلَّا مَا أَجمعُوا عَلَيْهِ، وَجل مَا تفرد بِهِ الْمُسْتَدْرك كالموكا عَلَيْهِ المخفي مَكَانَهُ فِي زمن مشايخهما وَإِن اشْتهر أمره من بعد، أَو مَا اخْتلف المحدثون فِي رِجَاله فالشيخان كأساتذتهما كَانَا يعتنيان بالبحث عَن نُصُوص الْأَحَادِيث فِي الْوَصْل والانقطاع وَغير ذَلِك حَتَّى يَتَّضِح الْحَال، وَالْحَاكِم يعْتَمد فِي الْأَكْثَر على قَوَاعِد مخرجة من صنائعهم كَقَوْلِه: زِيَادَة الثِّقَات مَقْبُولَة، وَإِذا اخْتلف النَّاس فِي الْوَصْل والإرسال وَالْوَقْف وَالرَّفْع وَغير ذَلِك فَالَّذِي حفظ الزِّيَادَة حجَّة على من لم يحفظ، وَالْحق أَنه كثيرا مَا يدْخل الْخلَل فِي الْحفاظ من قبل الْمَوْقُوف وَوصل الْمُنْقَطع لَا سِيمَا عِنْد رغبتهم فِي الْمُتَّصِل الْمَرْفُوع وتنويههم بِهِ، فالشيخان لَا يَقُولَانِ بِكَثِير مِمَّا يَقُوله الْحَاكِم، وَالله أعلم.
As for the two Ṣaḥīḥs[4], the hadith scholars have agreed that everything in them that is connected and elevated [muttaṣil marfūʿ] is authentic with certainty, and that they are continuously transmitted [mutawātir] to their compilers, and that whoever belittles their importance is an innovator [mubtadiʿ] following other than the way of the believers [sabīl al-mu’minīn]. If you want the clear truth, compare them with the book of Ibn Abī Shayba, the book of al-Ṭaḥāwī, the Musnad of al-Khawārizmī and others – you will find between them the distance of East and West. Al-Ḥākim made supplements[5] to them of hadith that are according to their conditions but which they did not mention. I have traced what he added and found that he was correct from one aspect and incorrect from another. That is because he found hadith narrated by the men of the Two Shaykhs [shaykhayn[6]] according to their conditions regarding authenticity and connection, so his addition to them was justified from this aspect.
However, the Two Shaykhs only mention a hadith that their teachers had debated and unanimously agreed to accept and authenticate, as Muslim indicated when he said: “I have not mentioned here except what they unanimously agreed upon.” Most of what al-Mustadrak uniquely included was like something suspected, its place hidden in the time of their teachers even if its matter became famous afterward, or what the hadith scholars differed about regarding its narrators. The Two Shaykhs, like their teachers, used to pay attention to researching the texts of hadith regarding connection, disconnection, and other matters until the situation became clear. Al-Ḥākim relies mostly on principles extracted from their works, such as his saying: “The addition of trustworthy narrators [thiqāt] is accepted,” and “When people differ regarding connection, transmission, stopping [waqf], elevation [rafʿ], and other matters, the one who preserved the addition is an authority over the one who did not preserve it.” The truth is that error often enters into the memorizers [ḥuffāẓ] regarding the stopped [mawqūf] and connecting the disconnected, especially when they desire the connected and elevated and praise it. So, the Two Shaykhs do not accept much of what al-Ḥākim says, and Allah knows best.
وَهَذِه الْكتب الثَّلَاثَة الَّتِي اعتنى القَاضِي عِيَاض فِي الْمَشَارِق بضبط مشكلها ورد تصحيفها.
These are the three books that al-Qādi ʿIyāḍ (d. 544 AH) took care of in al-Mashāriq[7] by verifying their difficult parts and correcting their textual corruptions [taṣḥīf].
الطَّبَقَة الثَّانِيَة: كتب لم تبلغ مبلغ الْمُوَطَّأ والصحيحين، وَلكنهَا تتلوها. كَانَ مصنفوها معروفين بالوثوق وَالْعَدَالَة وَالْحِفْظ والتبحر فِي فنون الحَدِيث، وَلم يرْضوا فِي كتبهمْ هَذِه بالتساهل فِيمَا اشترطوا على أنفسهم، فتلقاها من بعدهمْ بِالْقبُولِ، واعتنى بهَا المحدثون وَالْفُقَهَاء طبقَة بعد طبقَة، واشتهرت فِيمَا بَين النَّاس، وَتعلق بهَا الْقَوْم شرحا لغريبها وفحصا عَن رجالها واستنباطا لفقهها. وعَلى تِلْكَ الْأَحَادِيث بِنَاء عَامَّة الْعُلُوم كسنن أبي دَاوُد وجامع التِّرْمِذِيّ ومجتبى النَّسَائِيّ، وَهَذِه الْكتب مَعَ الطَّبَقَة الأ
وَهَذِه الْكتب مَعَ الطَّبَقَة الأولى اعتنى بأحاديثها رزين فِي تَجْرِيد الصِّحَاح وَابْن الْأَثِير فِي جَامع الْأُصُول وَكَاد مُسْند أَحْمد يكون من جملَة هَذِه الطَّبَقَة، فَإِن الإِمَام أَحْمد جعله أصلا يعرف بِهِ الصَّحِيح والسقيم قَالَ: مَا لَيْسَ فِيهِ فَلَا تقبلوه.
The Second Classification: Books that did not reach the level of al-Muwaṭṭa’ and the two Ṣaḥīḥs but follow them. Their compilers were known for trustworthiness [wuthūq], justice [ʿadāla], memorization [ḥifẓ], and deep knowledge in the branches of hadith. They were not satisfied in these books of theirs with leniency regarding what they stipulated upon themselves. Those who came after them received them with acceptance, and the hadith scholars and jurists paid attention to them generation after generation. They became famous among the people, and the community engaged with them by explaining their rare terms, investigating their narrators, and deriving their jurisprudence. Upon those hadith is built the foundation of general knowledge, such as the Sunan of Abū Dāwūd, the Jāmiʿ of al-Tirmidhī, and the Mujtabā of al-Nasā’ī. These books along with the first classification – Razīn took care of their hadith in Tajrīd al-Ṣiḥāḥ and Ibn al-Athīr in Jāmiʿ al-Uṣūl. The Musnad of Aḥmad almost belongs to this classification, for Imam Aḥmad made it a foundation by which the authentic and defective are known. He said: “What is not in it, do not accept it.”
والطبقة الثالثة: مسانيد وجوامع ومصنفات صنفت قبل البخاري ومسلم: وفي زمانهم وبعدهما، جمعت بين الصحيح والحسن والضعيف والمعروف والغريب والشاذ والمنكر والخطأ والصواب والثابت والمقلوب، ولم تشتهر في العلماء ذلك الاشتهار وإن زال عنها اسم النكارة المطلقة، ولم يتداول ما تفردت به الفقهاء كثير تداول، ولم يفحص عن صحتها وسقمها المحدثون كثير فحص ومنه ما لم يخدمه لغوي لشرح غريب، ولا فقيه لتطبيقه بمذاهب السلف ولا محدث ببيان مشكله، ولا مؤرخ بذكر أسماء رجاله ولا أريد المتأخرين المتعمقين، وإنما كلامي في الأئمة المتقدمين من أهل الحديث فهي باقية على استتارها واختفائها وخمولها كمسند أبي يعلى ومصنف عبد الرزاق ومصنف أبي بكر بن أبي شيبة ومسند عبد بن حميد، والطيالسي وكتب البيهقي والطحاوي والطبراني، وكان قصدهم جمع ما وجدوه لا تلخيصه وتهذيبه وتقريبه من العمل.
The Third Classification: Collections [masānīd], comprehensive works [jawāmiʿ], and compilations [muṣannafāt] that were compiled – before al-Bukhārī and Muslim, in their time, and after them – which gathered together the authentic [Ṣaḥīḥ], good [ḥasan], weak [ḍaʿīf], well-known [maʿrūf], rare [gharīb], anomalous [shādhdh], rejected [munkar], erroneous [khaṭa’], correct [ṣawāb], established [thābit], and inverted [maqlūb]. They did not achieve that level of fame among scholars, even though the designation of absolute rejection [nakāra muṭlaqa] was removed from them. The jurists did not widely circulate what they uniquely contained, and the hadith scholars did not extensively investigate their authenticity and defects. Some of them were not served by linguists to explain their rare terms, nor by jurists to apply them to the schools [madhāhib] of the predecessors [salaf], nor by hadith scholars to clarify their difficulties, nor by historians to mention the names of their narrators. I do not mean the later scholars who delved deeply, but rather my discussion is about the earlier Imams from the people of hadith. So, they remain in their concealment, hiddenness, and obscurity, such as the Musnad of Abū Yaʿlā, the Muṣannaf of ʿAbd al-Razzāq, the Muṣannaf of Abū Bakr ibn Abī Shayba, the Musnad of ʿAbd ibn Ḥumayd, al-Ṭayālisī, and the books of al-Bayhaqī, al-Ṭaḥāwī, and al-Ṭabarānī. Their purpose was to collect what they found, not to summarize it, refine it, and bring it closer to practical application [ʿamal].
والطبقة الرَّابِعَة. كتب قصد مصنفوها بعد قُرُون متطاولة جمع مَا لم يُوجد فِي الطبقتين الْأَوليين وَكَانَت فِي المجاميع وَالْمَسَانِيد المختفية فنوهوا بأمرها، وَكَانَت على أَلْسِنَة من لم يكْتب حَدِيثه المحدثون ككثير من الوعاظ المتشدقين وَأهل الْأَهْوَاء والضعفاء، أَو كَانَت من آثَار الصَّحَابَة وَالتَّابِعِينَ، أَو من أَخْبَار بني إِسْرَائِيل، أَو من كَلَام الْحُكَمَاء والوعاظ خلطها الروَاة بِحَدِيث النَّبِي ﷺ سَهوا أَو عمدا، أَو كَانَت من محتملات الْقُرْآن والْحَدِيث الصَّحِيح، فرواها بِالْمَعْنَى قوم صَالِحُونَ لَا يعْرفُونَ غوامض الرِّوَايَة، فَجعلُوا الْمعَانِي أَحَادِيث مَرْفُوعَة، أَو كَانَت مَعَاني مفهومة من إشارات الْكتاب وَالسّنة جعلوها أَحَادِيث مستبدة برأسها عمدا، أَو كَانَت جملا شَتَّى فِي أَحَادِيث مُخْتَلفَة جعلوها حَدِيثا وَاحِدًا بنسق وَاحِد، ومظنة هَذِه الْأَحَادِيث كتاب الضُّعَفَاء لِابْنِ حبَان وكامل ابْن عدي، وَكتب الْخَطِيب وَأبي نعيم والجوزقاني وَابْن عَسَاكِر وَابْن النجار والديلمي، وَكَاد مُسْند الْخَوَارِزْمِيّ يكون من هَذِه الطَّبَقَة، وَأصْلح هَذِه الطَّبَقَة مَا كَانَ ضَعِيفا مُحْتملا وأسوؤها مَا كَانَ مَوْضُوعا أَو مقلوبا شَدِيد النكارة. وَهَذِه الطَّبَقَة مَادَّة كتاب الموضوعات لِابْنِ الْجَوْزِيّ.
The Fourth Classification: Books whose compilers intended, after long centuries, to collect what was not found in the first two classifications and was in the hidden collections and compilations [majāmiʿ wa’l-masānīd], so they highlighted their importance. They were on the tongues of those whose hadith the hadith scholars did not record, such as many of the eloquent preachers, people of personal opinions [ahl al-ahwā’], and weak narrators [ḍuʿafā’]. Or they were from the narrations [āthār] of the Companions and Followers, or from the reports of the Children of Israel [akhbār banī Isrā’īl], or from the words of wise men and preachers which the narrators mixed with the hadith of the Prophet ﷺ inadvertently or intentionally. Or they were from the possible interpretations of the Qur’an and authentic hadith, which righteous people who did not know the subtleties of narration transmitted by meaning [bi’l-maʿnā], so they made the meanings into elevated hadith [aḥādīth marfūʿa]. Or they were meanings understood from allusions [ishārāt] in the Book and Sunna which they made into independent hadith intentionally. Or they were various phrases from different hadith which they made into one hadith in one sequence. The likely source of these hadith is the book al-Ḍuʿafā’ by Ibn Ḥibbān, al-Kāmil by Ibn ʿAdī, and the books of al-Khaṭīb, Abū Nuʿaym, al-Jawzaqānī, Ibn ʿAsākir, Ibn al-Najjār, and al-Daylamī. The Musnad of al-Khawārizmī almost belongs to this classification. The best of this classification is what was weak but possible [ḍaʿīf muḥtamal], and the worst is what was fabricated [mawḍūʿ] or inverted with severe rejection [maqlūb shadīd al-nakāra]. This classification is the source material for the book al-Mawḍūʿāt by Ibn al-Jawzī.
هَهُنَا طبقَة خَامِسَة مِنْهَا مَا اشْتهر على أَلْسِنَة الْفُقَهَاء والصوفية والمؤرخين وَنَحْوهم، وَلَيْسَ لَهُ أصل فِي هَذِه الطَّبَقَات الْأَرْبَع، وَمِنْهَا مَا دسه الماجن فِي دينه الْعَالم بِلِسَانِهِ فَأتى بِإِسْنَاد قوي لَا يُمكن الْجرْح فِيهِ، وَكَلَام بليغ لَا يبعد صدروه عَنهُ ﷺ، فأثار فِي الْإِسْلَام مُصِيبَة عَظِيمَة، لَكِن الجهابذة من أهل الحَدِيث يوردون مثل ذَلِك على المتابعات والشواهد، فتهتك الأستار وَيظْهر العوار،
Here is a fifth classification, part of which became famous on the tongues of jurists, Sufis [ṣūfiyya], historians, and the like, but has no foundation in these four classifications. Part of it consists of what was inserted by the dissolute in his religion but skilled with his tongue, who came with a strong chain [isnād qawī] that cannot be criticized, and eloquent speech that would not be unlikely to have issued from him ﷺ, thus causing a great calamity [muṣība ʿaẓīma] in Islam. However, the experts among the people of hadith subject such things to corroborating narrations [mutābaʿāt] and supporting evidence [shawāhid], so the veils are torn and the defects become apparent.
أما الطَّبَقَة الأولى وَالثَّانيَِة فعلَيْهِمَا اعْتِمَاد الْمُحدثين، وحوم حماهما مرتعهم ومسرحهم. وَأما الثَّالِثَة فَلَا يُبَاشِرهَا للْعَمَل عَلَيْهَا وَالْقَوْل بهَا إِلَّا النحارير الجهابذة الَّذين يحفظون أَسمَاء الرِّجَال وَعلل الْأَحَادِيث، نعم رُبمَا يُؤْخَذ مِنْهَا المتابعات والشواهد. ﴿قد جعل الله لكل شَيْء قدرا﴾ .
As for the first and second classifications, upon them is the reliance [iʿtimād] of the hadith scholars, and around their sanctuary is their pasture and field. As for the third, no one should directly engage with it for acting upon it and accepting it except the eminent experts who memorize the names of narrators and the defects [ʿilal] of hadith. Yes, perhaps corroborating narrations and supporting evidence may be taken from it. ﴾Allah has appointed a measure for all things﴿ [Quran 65:3].
وَأما الرَّابِعَة فالاشتغال بجمعها أَو الاستنباط مِنْهَا نوع تعمق من الْمُتَأَخِّرين. وَإِن شِئْت الْحق فطوائف المبتدعين من الرافضة والمعتزلة وَغَيرهم يتمكنون بِأَدْنَى عناية أَن يلخصوا مِنْهَا شَوَاهِد مذاهبهم، فالانتصار بهَا غير صَحِيح فِي معارك الْعلمَاء بِالْحَدِيثِ، وَالله أعلم.
As for the fourth, engaging in collecting from it or deriving from it is a type of excessive depth from the later scholars. If you want the truth, groups of innovators [ṭawā’if al-mubtadiʿīn] from the Rāfiḍa (Shi’a), Muʿtazila, and others are able with the slightest effort to extract from it evidence [shawāhid] for their schools. So, relying upon it for support [intiṣār] is not sound in the battles of the hadith scholars, and Allah knows best. End of quote.
[1] A type of disconnected chain where the link between the Successor [tābiʿī] and the Prophet (ﷺ) is missing – the missing link being a Companion [ṣaḥābī] – e.g. when a Successor [tābiʿī] says, “The Prophet ﷺ said …”.
[2] This is recorded in Jāmiʿ al-Tirmidhī as follows: 2680- Al-Ḥasan ibn al-Ṣabbāḥ al-Bazzār and Isḥāq ibn Mūsā al-Anṣārī narrated to us, they said: Sufyān ibn ʿUyayna narrated to us, from Ibn Jurayj, from Abū al-Zubayr, from Abū Ṣāliḥ, from Abū Hurayra, as a narration: “Very soon people will beat the livers of camels seeking knowledge, and they will not find anyone more knowledgeable than the knowledgeable scholar of Madina.” This is a good [ḥasan] ḥadīth and it is the ḥadīth of Ibn ʿUyayna. And it has been narrated from Ibn ʿUyayna that he said regarding this: “He was asked, ‘Who is the knowledgeable scholar of Madina?’ So he said: ‘It is Mālik ibn Anas.'” And Isḥāq ibn Mūsā said: “I heard Ibn ʿUyayna saying: ‘It is al-ʿUmarī the ascetic.'” And I heard Yaḥyā ibn Mūsā saying: “ʿAbd al-Razzāq said: ‘It is Mālik ibn Anas.'” And al-ʿUmarī is ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz ibn ʿAbd Allah from the descendants of ʿUmar ibn al-Khaṭṭāb.
[3] This is Muhammad ibn al-Ḥasan al-Shaybani.
[4] Meaning Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī and Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim.
[5] Under the title: Al-Mustadrak ʿalā al-Ṣaḥīḥayn [The Supplement/Follow-up to the Two Ṣaḥīḥs].
[6] Meaning Imams – Al-Bukhari and Muslim ibn al-Hajjaj.
[7] The full title being: Mashāriq al-Anwār ʿalā Ṣiḥāḥ al-Āthār.
Translation and notes by:
Abul Hasan Hussain Ahmed
30-6-25/5th of Muharram 1447 AH
