Hadith Criticism

Abstract

This paper is an introduction to hadith criticism. It discusses the definition of “hadith criticism” and expounds upon its related terminologies. In addition, it seeks to clarify both the standing of hadith criticism within the science of hadith and its beginning.

Hadith criticism (naqd al-ḥadīth)

In simplest terms, Hadith criticism is the science that focuses on detecting weaknesses in hadiths. Linguistically naqd is to manifest something or its manifestation.[1] There are many different definitions for naqd as a term but ultimately, they all express the same thing which is “the critical examination of hadiths in compliance with the rules established by the hadith critics (sg. nāqid, pl. nuqqād).” The contemporary hadith scholar Al-Azami defines naqd as “distinguishing between authentic and inauthentic hadiths and judging their narrators’ trustworthiness.”[2] The Arabic term naqd al-ḥadīth is generally used to refer to the process of scholarly Hadith criticism. Furthermore, the weakness revealed in a hadith-by-hadith criticism is called ʿilla (pl. ʿilal).

Definition of ʿilla, pl. ʿilal – عِلَّةٌ – عِلَلٌ

Linguistically ʿilla denotes various meanings including an obstacle, disease, or blemish.[3] In the science of hadith it refers to one of two:

An apparent weakness in a hadith that negates its authenticity or authority. Al-Tirmiḏi (d. 279/892) has been found to use ʿilla to indicate abrogation (naskh), which negates the authority of a hadith as legal evidence albeit it is authentic per se.[4] An example of an apparent weakness would be the discovery of a known unreliable narrator in the chain of narration.

1. A hidden weakness in the chain of narration (isnād) or narrated text (matn) that negates the authenticity of a hadith despite its apparent soundness.[5]

2.ʿIlla, as a hidden weakness, is the subject of intense research and will be the topic of discussion in this paper. The eminent hadith scholar Ibn Ḥajar (d. 852/1448) defines a hadith exhibiting ʿilla as a hadith “that appears authentic and error-free outwardly, but upon closer examination reveals a (hidden) weakness.”[6] This type of hadith is called ḥadīth muʿall or maʿlūl.[7]

Categories of ʿilla

Hadith weaknesses as mentioned earlier, appear in both the isnād and matn, although according to Ibn Ṣalāḥ (d. 643/1245) it is usually the isnād that is affected by such weaknesses. The explanation for this may be the fact that a narrator as the bearer of the matn may make mistakes during the transmission process, whether in the chain of narration, in the content transmitted, or in both. Consequently, the error is always attributable to the narrator who made the mistake. A ʿilla in the isnād as discussed by Ibn Ḥajar, can lead either to the rejection of the entire hadith, or merely to the weakening of the isnād without affecting the matn.

Ibn Ḥajar lists the following areas that an ʿilla can occur and its possible effects on a hadith:

1. An ʿilla in the isnād that affects neither the isnād nor matn. This occurs, for example, when a trustworthy mudallis narrates a hadith, once with some obscurity in the isnād (ʿanʿanah) and another time without it. In this case, the isnād without obscurity elucidates the obscure one, thus the hadith remains unaffected.

2. An ʿilla in the isnād that affects the isnād and not the matn. For instance, when one trusted narrator or his first name is exchanged with another trusted one or his first name (for example, ʿAmr b. Dīnār is mentioned instead of ʿAbdullāh b. Dīnār; both are trustworthy). In this case, the isnād has been disrupted because the path of transmission has been narrated incorrectly. However, this does not fault the matn because ultimately both narrators are trustworthy.

3. An ʿilla in the isnād that negatively affects both the isnād and matn. This is manifest, for example, when a narrator mistakes an unreliable narrator for a reliable one. Take the case of Ḥammād b. Usāmah, he heard that a reliable narrator by the name of ʿAbdurraḥmān b. Yazīd b. Jābir resides in Kufa so he travelled there to learn from him his hadiths. However, when he got there he was nowhere to be found. After a while, someone with a similar name came to Kufa, whom Ḥammād mistook for the narrator he was looking for. Therefore, Ḥammād asked him who he was and he replied “ʿAbdurraḥmān b. Yazīd.” The latter is ʿAbdurraḥmān b. Yazīd b. Tamīm, a weak narrator. Due to this, Ḥammād’s hadith on ʿAbdurraḥmān b. Yazīd are categorized as weak by al-Bukhārī, Abu Ḥātim, and others.

4. An ʿilla in the matn that affects neither the isnād nor matn. An example of this would be literal variations of an authentic hadith, which at first seem contradictory, yet can be reconciled.

5. An ʿilla in the matn that affects only the isnād. Like when a narrator narrates a hadith with the meaning of the matn without full comprehension of the matn, while the same hadith has been soundly narrated with another isnād. The narrator would be held responsible for this error.

6. A ʿilla in the matn that negatively affects both the isnād and matn. For instance, what results from a misrepresented matn, so they both, the isnād and matn would be classified as weak.[8]

Relevance of hadith criticism (naqd al-ḥadīth)

As time passed by, we got further from the time of the Prophet ﷺ. This naturally resulted in an increase of the number of hadith narrators, which unfortunately lead to the emergence of many more untrustworthy narrators. Moreover, theological and political conflicts as well as the death of the majority of the Prophet’s companions, the first bearers of the hadiths, allowed many weak and fabricated hadiths to flourish. Furthermore, not only was the preservation of the traditional statements and actions of the Prophet ﷺ emphasized; rather, there was a rigorous effort to identify the deluge of weak hadiths that had come into circulation. This necessitated the intensive study of the hadiths and the critical examination of the narrators and their statements. Identifying the apparent weaknesses was not so much the problem as that of hidden weaknesses that only the very well versed could pick out. Thus, uncovering ʿilal in hadiths became the primary task of hadith criticism.

The general injunction to scrutinize any news or report is found in the Quran, “O believers, if an evildoer brings you any news, verify ˹it˺ so you do not harm people unknowingly, becoming regretful for what you have done.”[9] For Muslims and hadith scholars specifically, questioning religious reports held more significance than general reports. Moreover, it is narrated that the Messenger ﷺ, regarding the danger of reporting something false about him, said, “Whoever deliberately spreads a lie about me shall occupy his seat in Hell-fire,”[10] or “Whoever reports about me what appears to be a lie, he is counted among the liars.”[11]

Various statements regarding the importance of hadith criticism can be found in the speech of the early hadith scholars. ʿAbdurraḥmān b. Mahdi (d. 198/813) said, “I would much rather prefer uncovering a ʿillah in a hadith than to know 20 other new hadiths.”[12] Further, ʿAli b. al-Madīni (d. 234/848) adds, “It once took me 40 years to uncover a ʿillah in a ḥadīth.”[13] Al-Khathīb al-Baghdādi (d. 463/1070) said regarding ʿilal, “Knowledge of (uncovering) ʿilal is among the best disciplines.”[14]

Experts of hadith criticism (nuqqād, sg. nāqid)

In every science, there are scholars that stand out from the rest, and the science of hadith is no exception. Abu Ḥātim (d. 277/890) wrote regarding this the following, “The most competent in discerning authentic from inauthentic hadiths and their classification were Aḥmad b. Ḥanbal (d. 241/855), Yaḥya b. Maʿīn (d. 233/847), and ʿAli b. al-Madīni (d. 234/848). Then Abu Zurʿah (d. 264/877) after them. Besides him, I know of none in these times!”[15]

The Hanbali hadith scholar Ibn Rajab al-Ḥanbali (d.795/1392) states, “From the great hadith scholars, only a few specialized in hadith criticism. The first of them to become prominent was Ibn Sīrīn (d.110/728), then Ayyūb as-Sikhtiyāni (d. 131/748) followed, from whom al-Shuʿbah (d. 160/776) learned. Then came al-Shuʿbah’s two disciples; Yaḥya al-Qaṭṭān (d. 198/813) and Ibn Mahdi (d. 198/913). From them two emanated Imām Aḥmad (d. 241/855), ʿAli b. al-Madīni (d. 234/848), and Ibn Maʿīn (d. 233/847). They too had disciples to whom they passed on their knowledge, such as al-Bukhāri (d. 256/869), Abu Dāwūd (d. 275/888), Abu Zurʿah (d. 264/877), and Abu Ḥātim (d. 277/890). […] They were succeeded by al-Nasāʾi (d. 303/915), al-ʿUqaili (d. 322/933), Ibn ʿAdiyy (d. 365/975), and al-Daraquṭni (d. 385/995). Thereafter, hardly anyone remained to hold their mantle, till the point that Ibn al-Jawzi (d. 597/1200) concluded, ‘Currently, there is barely anyone, if any, who is proficient in this discipline, and Allah knows best.’“[16] From this it can be induced that hadith criticism emerged very early on owing to the great tābiʿi; Ibn Sīrīn (d. 110/728). Afterwards, it trickled down to only a handful; generation-to-generation. With that in mind, it becomes evident that this discipline is a science that is difficult to master and that only a few excelled in.

Characteristics of an expert in hadith criticism

There are countless statements in the hadith literature that detail the characteristics of an expert in hadith criticism. For example, Ibn Ḥajar (d. 852/1448) mentions, “The [study of] muʿallal ḥadīths is among the most precise and difficult disciplines. To master it, one needs a grounded understanding, strong memory and comprehensive knowledge regarding hadith narrators, along with a deep comprehension of the various lore and chains of narration. Therefore only few mastered it…”[17]

The contemporary Yemeni hadith scholar, Al-Muʿallimi (d. 1949), explains this by saying, “The scholars [acquired] these skills after a very long journey of knowledge-seeking; hadith sessions; transcriptions; compiling the hadiths from a teacher and memorizing the names, epithets, tribes, countries and birth and death dates of the narrators. Also, by documenting the exact dates of when they started acquiring knowledge and attending hadith sessions, their travels in different countries for seeking knowledge, from whom and where they acquired knowledge, when exactly they heard the hadiths, how they heard them, who was with them when they heard it, and which manuscript was referred to. Not to mention that they documented all the aforementioned information about the narrators’ teachers as well. They knew and did all that, together with their broad knowledge of the various hadiths and highly detailed information about the narrators from innumerable chains of narration; like knowing whether a narrator is reliable or unreliable, or the sincerity of the untrustworthy narrators and who was known to add to a hadith or for their weakness […].”[18]

Beginnings of Hadith Criticism

Although there is a general acceptance regarding the narrations of the Prophet’s ﷺ companions on him,[19] there were particular instances that were subject to questioning. Consider the following event:

When an elderly woman demanded from the Caliph Abu-Bakr her inheritance from her grandson, he refused to fulfill her request until he verified with someone that the grandmother gets a share according to the Quran or the Sunnah of the Prophet’s ﷺ. Thus, the Prophet’s companion al-Mughīrah b. Shuʿbah came forward and announced, “I was there when the Prophet gave a sixth to the grandmother.” Abu Bakr then asked whether anyone else could confirm this. Thereafter, Muḥammad b. Maslamah came forward and confirmed it.[20] We notice in this incident that a companion verified the report of another by consulting other companions. Another method of verification among them was to travel to each other to hear or confirm certain statements or reports about the Prophet ﷺ. Abu Ayyūb al-Anṣāri, for example, undertook a journey to Egypt to meet ʿUqbah b. ʿĀmir to hear from him a hadith that he had already heard before.[21] Likewise, Jābir b. ʿAbdullāh undertook a month-long journey just to hear a hadith from ʿAbdullāh b. Unais.[22]

When the era of the third caliph ʿUthmān ended in the first/seventh century respectively, the first known fabricated narrations emerged. This put the companions on high alert when accepting hadiths. This is seen in the well-known event of Bushair b. Kaʿb. One day, he narrated hadiths on the Prophet in the presence of Ibn ʿAbbās saying, “The Messenger of Allāh ﷺ said such and such, and the Messenger of Allāh ﷺ said such and such” Nevertheless, Ibn ʿAbbās neither gave ear to him, nor considered his hadiths. Then he cried out, “O Ibn ʿAbbās, why do you not listen to my hadiths? I am narrating about the Messenger of Allāh ﷺ yet you are not listening!?” Ibn ʿAbbās replied, “When we heard someone say ‘the Messenger of Allāh ﷺ said such and such,’ we used to immediately give our full attention to him and start listening carefully. However, once people started to accept everything, whether good or bad, we confined ourselves to only accept what we were familiar with.”[23] Albeit Bushair b. Kaʿb lived at the time of the Prophet ﷺ, he never met him and was therefore considered a tabiʿi (successor to the Prophet’s companions). This means that any hadith he narrates on the Prophet ﷺ must be classified as mursal (interrupted); without a complete chain of narration returning to the Prophet ﷺ.[24]

With the expansion of the Muslim empire and the geographical dispersion of the successors to the Prophet’s ﷺ legacy, hadiths spread to the various Islamic regions. As time progressed, longer chains of narration emerged with each new generation, increasing the potential for error. In addition, theological and political conflicts allowed for the fabrications of hadiths. All these aspects together contributed to the fact that, on the one hand, hadiths were fabricated and on the other hand, weaknesses were deliberately planted into existing hadiths. In most cases, unreliable and untrustworthy narrators were to blame, although reliable narrators were also partly liable.

Methods for revealing ʿilal

Weaknesses and errors that crept up and became widespread in hadiths necessitated hadith scholars to act fast and counteract this problem. Many of these weaknesses were recognized immediately. Nonetheless, to divulge the possible hidden weaknesses (ʿilal) of hadiths, it became imperative for the hadith scholars to subject both the hadiths and their narrators to extreme scrutiny. As a result, various methods were formed to examine hadith narrators based on their trustworthiness (ʿadālah) and competency in preserving the text (ḍabt). Still further, the hadith scholars tried to verify whether each narrator had actually met and heard directly from his source and the possibility of doing so.

After the examination of each narrator, if all were found to be trustworthy, they would compare between the various chains of narration of a hadith along with its wording. In the case that minimal to no significant differences were found, hadith scholars would classify the hadith to be free from any ʿillah. However, if there were differences and inconsistencies, they would infer that the hadith contains ʿillah, in either its text or its chain of narration, and try to possibly locate and specify the narrator responsible.[25]

a. Suʾālāt works

As hadith narrators were under strict scrutiny and subject to comparisons, so too were hadith texts. Similarities between them strengthened the credibility of narrators, while irregularities rose many doubts. To verify such doubts, hadith scholars came up with various techniques. For example, they would gather to discuss and compare between hadith texts and texts in general, students would ask their teachers about their position on certain hadiths and then jot it down. ʿAbdullāh b. Aḥmad (290/902) used to ask his father, Aḥmad b. Ḥanbal (241/855), about his position regarding many hadiths and narrators and then write it down until he compiled, what is now a three-volume piece of work, al-ʿIlal wa maʿrifat al-rijāl (Hidden Weaknesses [in Hadiths] & Knowing the Narrators). Other disciples of Aḥmad b. Ḥanbal (241/855) also did the same, such as Abu Dawūd (275/888).

Al-Tirmiḏi (279/892) put into writing many of his question and answer sessions regarding the state of certain hadiths and narrators with his teacher al-Bukhāri (256/869), which he later included in his well-known hadith collection Sunan al-Tirmiḏi. Further, Abu Ḥātim (277/890) and Abu Zurʿah’s (264/877) criticism of over approximately 3000 hadiths was well-documented by the former’s son, Ibn Abu Hātim (327/938), and then compiled in the highly regarded seven-volume work ʿIlal al-Ḥadīth (Hidden Defects in Hadiths).

b. ʿIlal works

Another common method of hadith criticism was authoring independent works in which they examined hadiths or listed their weaknesses and errors. These works include, but are not limited to, books such as al- ʿIlal by ʿAli b. al-Madīni (234/848), Kitāb al-Tamyīz by Imām Muslim (261/874), ʿIlal al-Kabīr wa al-Ṣaghīr by al-Tirmiḏi (279/892), and al-ʿIlal by al-Dāraquṭni (385/995).

c. Ṣaḥīḥ works

It is to be noted that indeed many hadith collections came into being only after comprehensive hadith criticism. These hadith collections were precisely cherry picked by pioneers of this science, filtered from hundreds of thousands of hadiths and then structured thematically. This inevitably gave birth to many different genres of hadith collections. For example, the ṣaḥīḥ works were compiled in compliance with the highest criteria of authentic hadiths. The condition of not listing weak hadiths in a ṣaḥīḥ collection, but rather only listing hadiths that pass the highest standard of authenticity, guided Imām al-Bukhāri (256/869) to compile his well-known work “Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhāri.” From 600,000 traditions that he knew, he selected approximately 7,000 hadiths (including repetitions) to incorporate in his work.[26] This was made only possible after a long period of collecting, refining, and criticizing. It is reported that he spent about 16 years to compile his work.[27] The disciple of al-Bukhāri, Muslim b. al-Ḥajjāj (261/875), followed a similar path in his prestigious ṣaḥīḥ work “al-Musnad al-ṣaḥīḥ.” He relates that, for his hadith collection, he carefully chose from 300,000 hadiths,[28] after extensive hadith criticism, in order that all the hadiths fulfill his criteria for authentic hadiths. This took him approximately 15 years. [29]

Al-Bukhāri and Muslim were thus the first to make hadith collections with the requirement of only including the soundest of hadiths. Their collections triggered the first wave of what is referred to as “The Ṣaḥīḥ-current.” Their two works are known as the ṣaḥīḥain (“the two Sahīhs”). They became the most famous of authentic hadith collections and still hold the position as the most authentic collections today. They were criticized by some hadith scholars, such as al-Dāraquṭni (385/995), but this in turn was met with countercriticism from other hadith scholars. This will be discussed again in more detail later.

d. Sunan works

The sunan works share a similar path to that of the ṣaḥīḥ works, as they were also compiled as a result of careful selection and hadith criticism. Although the primary intention here was not to list only authentic hadiths, these hadiths were also included in the collections only after extensive criticism. Abu Dāwūd (275/888) only graded some of the hadiths in his hadith collection, and the rest he merely listed. He explains in his short letter, Risālat Abu Dāwūd ila ahli Makka (Letter of Abu Dāwūd to the Inhabitants of Mecca), why he merely listed them. Though, if he mentioned a very weak hadith, he would not go without clarifying it. If he does not mention anything about a hadith, it is understood that it is sound and acceptable (ṣāliḥ), albeit varying in terms of strength.[30]

Al-Jāmiʿ by al-Tirmiḏi (279/892), one of al-Bukhārī’s companions and disciples, is another prominent sunan work. It contains approximately 4,000 hadiths and focuses on hadiths that were utilized by the various fiqh schools as legal evidence. Even though its hadiths have also been a source of debate, it includes several unreliable hadiths. He classifies them in terms of authenticity, often citing his teacher Imam al-Bukhāri.

This is the case with the rest of the sunan hadith collections, about which detailed explanations will be published soon. Thus, it is evident that sunan works were also subject to hadith criticism. Additionally, the aim of these sunan works was to compile the hadiths that can be used as evidence for legal judgments.

Induction of the rules of hadith criticism

When most of the hadith collections were complete, upon the end of the fourth century, the hadith scholars started analyzing them to extract rules as a bases for hadith criticism. These rules were written down in what came to be known as muṣtalaḥ books. The most important and well-known works written are mentioned chronologically in the introduction.

[1] Ibn Faris, Muʿjam Maqāyīs al-lughah, vol. 5, p. 467.

[2] Muslim, Muqaddima al-Taḥqīq, p. 8. See also: Ahmad Yusuf, Tārīkh Ibn Maʿīn, vol. 1, p. 6, Al-ʿĀbid, Muqaddima fī naqd al-ḥadīth, p. 10.

[3] Ibn Fāris, Muʿjam Maqāyīs al-Lughah, vol. 4, pp. 12-14.

[4] Ibn al-Ṣalāḥ, ʿUlūm al-Ḥadīth, p. 84.

[5] Ibid, p. 81.

[6] Ibn Hajar, al-Nukat, vol. 2, p. 186; Fatḥ al-Bāri, vol. 1, p. 226. Ibn al-Ṣalāḥ, ʿUlūm al-Ḥadīth, p. 81.

[7] Ibn Manẓūr, Lisān al-ʿArab, vol. 11, p. 471. Even though both are used, there are differences of opinion among scholars as to whether maʿlul is correct in terms of syntax. Ibn al-Ṣalāḥ is of the opinion that it is wrong and even reprehensible (marʿdhūl), ʿUlūm al-Ḥadīth p. 81. The same opinion is held by al-Nawāwi, cf. al-Taqrīb p. 161. Nevertheless, both terms refer to the same thing.

[8] Cf. Ibn Ḥajar, al-Nukat, vol. 2, pp. 746-748.

[9] Surah Al-Ḥujurāt, 49:6. English translation from the Clear Quran, by Dr. Mustafa Khattab.

[10] Narrated by al-Bukhāri no. 1291 and Muslim in his Muqaddimah p. 10.

[11] Muslim, Muqaddimah, p. 8.

[12] Ibn Abu Ḥātim, Muqaddimah ʿIlal al-Ḥadīth, vol. 1, p. 10.

[13] Al-Khathīb al-Baghdādi, al-Jāmiʿ li Akhlāq al-Rāwi, vol. 2, p. 257.

[14] Ibid. Vol. 2, p. 294.

[15] Ibn Abu Ḥātim, al-Jarḥ wa al-Taʿdīl, vol. 2, p. 23.

[16] Ibn Rajab, Jāmiʿ al-ʿUlūm wa al-Ḥikam, pp. 241-242.

[17] Ibn Ḥajar, Nuzhat al-Naẓar, p. 43.

[18] Muqaddimah Sahih Muslim, vol. 1, p. 13, Al-Muʿallimi, al-Nukat al-Jiyād, vol. 1, p. 10.

[19] Cf. al-Ṭabarāni, al-Muʿjam al-Kabīr, no. 699, al-Ḥākim, al-Mustadrak, no. 6458.

[20] Imam Malik, al-Muwaṭṭaʾ, vol. 2, p. 531.

[21] Al-Ḥumaidi, al-Musnad, vol. 1, p. 189.

[22] Imam Aḥmad, al-Musnad, vol. 3, p. 495.

[23] Imām Muslim, Muqaddimah Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim, vol. 1, pp. 12-13.

[24] Al-ʿAlāʾi, Jamiʿ al-Taḥṣīl, pp. 68 u. 83.

[25] Cf. Ibn Hajar, al-Nukat, vol. 2, pp. 186 f.

[26] See Ibn Manẓūr Mukhtaṣar Tārīkh Dimashq.

[27] See: Al-Khathīb, Tārīkh Baghdād, vol. 2, p. 14.

[28] Ibid, vol. 15, p. 121.

[29] Al-Dhahabi, Siyar Aʿlām al-Nubalāʾ, Bd. 12, S. 566.

[30] Abu Dāwūd, Risālah Abu Dāwūd ila Ahl Makkah, S. 27.