Authentic Hadith

A Hadith does not necessarily have to be reported only in a particular and specific book to be qualified as authentic. Instead, it should satisfy a certain criteria to be regarded as authentic. Firstly, we should take a look at its chain of narration. If all the narrators in its chain of narration are authentic and there is no omission or interruption in chain of narration, then in principle, this Hadith will be called Saheeh or authentic.

A Saheeh or an authentic Hadith is not only found in Saheeh Bukhari or Saheeh Muslim. It may be found in other books besides these two, such as Abu Dawood, Tirmizi, Nasai, Ibn Maajah, or in other books of Hadith whereby its Sanad or chain of narration is sound.

At times, a Hadith may seem weak as per its chain of narration, but the 'Ulama of the time of the Taabi'in and the Taba Taabi'in have accepted it favourably. The fact that the 'Ulama of those times have approved of it, is a clear indication that the Hadith is well established on solid proof and principle. Thus, the Hadith is regarded as authentic. Similarly, sometimes a Hadith may seem correct in regards to its Sanad but the 'Ulama did not take it into consideration. The fact that the 'Ulama did not take it into consideration indicates that there is something amiss and not in order. So we will not take that Hadith into consideration too. It is also an established principle by the scholars of Hadith that when a Mujtahid such as Imam Abu Hanifah, Imam Malik, Imam Shafi'i or Imam Ahmad Bin Hambal or any other 'Ulama who have attained the rank of a Mujtahid, present a Hadith as proof, then it means that this Hadith is authentic according to the Mujtahid.

When we say that a Hadith is authentic or weak, then this emanated from the illustrious 'Ulama in the domain of Hadith based on their specifications. This did not emanate from Rasulullah (Sallalaahu Alaihi Wasallam). It was based on the opinion of the 'Ulama. That is why there may be differences regarding the position of a Hadith. A Hadith may be an authentic Hadith according to one 'Aalim but it may be very weak according to the analysis of another.

It must be understood that the Muhadditheen (the scholars in the field of Hadith) were not hazarded in their analysis. In fact, they were very meticulous in their research, analysis and verdict. Only a reckless person would dare say that such and such Imam had made a mistake in his analysis. These Imams, whom we are speaking about, are not like the Imam or the 'Ulama of nowadays. We say this not intending to show disrespect to the Imam and the 'Ulama of nowadays. Rather, this statement was only being made so that people do not underestimate the Imam and the 'Ulama of the past such as the 4 Imams. All of this happens when people have no knowledge or they have learned but they have not yet mastered their field. It is this very same lack of mastery that causes some graduates to say: "It is a Hadith Maqbul (acceptable) because there is a Majhool (unknown) narrator in its Sanad. That is why it is a weak Hadith." See, the Hadith is acceptable because of the presence of an unknown narrator! That is not all. It is a weak Hadith because it is Maqbul (acceptable)!!!

If graduates are making such slips, then what about the impostors without knowledge? Indeed, it is a very complicated domain. We should therefore take a lot of precaution and be very careful before uttering anything.

[English version of “Hadice authentique” - Al Jamiat Vol.8 No.4]