Introduction
Methodology of Research and Tracing of Ahâdith
Praise is to Allâh. We extol Him and seek His help. None can misguide him whom Allâh guides and none can guide him whom Allâh misguides. I bear witness that there is no God except Allâh, Alone, without any partner, and I bear witness that Muhammad is His slave and His Messenger. The best speech is the Book of Allâh and the best course is the course of Muhammad ﷺ while the worst things are (religious) innovations and every innovation is an error and a delusion.
I thank Allâh, our Lord, Who made it possible for me to research and trace the Ahâdith of Sunan Arba'ah (Sunan Abu Dâwud, Sunan Tirmidhi, Sunan Nasâ'i and Sunan Ibn Mâjah).
Among the four Sunan, Sunan Ibn Mâjah holds a prominent place. I have already done research work and written a commentary on it in Arabic under the title Tas-hilul-Hâjah fi Mukhtasar Takhrij Sunan Ibn Mâjah. It is included in the Urdu edition now. To know my work and methodology, in this treatise, the following points need to be borne in mind:
• Sunan Ibn Mâjah contains two types of Ahâdith: a) Ahâdith that occur in Sahih Bukhârî or Sahih Muslim or in both. b) Ahâdith that occur neither in Bukhârî nor in Muslim.
• My own research finding is that all the Musnad (with chains of narrations) and Marfu' (traceable to the Prophet ﷺ) Ahâdith of Sahih Bukhârî and Sahih Muslim are Sound (Sahih). This is also the opinion of all the scholars of the nation. As for the other Ahâdith, I have given my verdict as to their soundness or weakness. See, for example, Hadith no. 50: the chain of narration is Hasan (Good), and Hadith no. 11: the chain of narration is Da'îf (Weak).
• If I ruled a narration to be Weak, I also stated my reasons for that. For example, Hadith no. 19: Abu Bakr bin Khallâd Al-Bâhili narrated to us from Yahya bin Sa'eed from Shu'bah from Ibn 'Ajlân that 'Awn bin 'Abdullah told him, narrating from 'Abdullah bin Mas'ud. After I had declared it to be Weak, I wrote: "There is an interruption (Inqitâ') in its chain of narration because 'Awn bin 'Abdullah did not hear from 'Abdullah bin Mas'ud."
• When I ruled a Hadith to be Hasan or Sahih, I also gave the reference of another Hadith scholar in case he also declared it to be so. See, for example, Hadith no. 87.
• In case a narration of Ibn Mājah occurs in Bukhârī and Muslim as well as in other books, I have given the reference of Bukhârī and Muslim only while tracing it. See, for example, Hadith no. 10: (Muslim) although this narration also exists in Sunan Tirmidhi (Hadith no. 2229).
• The references of Bukhârī and Muslim do not mean that the narration, with respect to its text, is exactly the same in both Bukhârī and Muslim. It only means that the narration in both the books is the same with respect to the chain of narration. As to the text, it may be long in one and short in the other or vice versa or words may differ but the meaning is the same.
• Since, according to research scholars, Bukhârī has precedence over Muslim, I have given precedence to Bukhârī while tracing Ahādīth. But in some places, Muslim has been mentioned first while tracing. The reason for that is that a greater part of the chain of narration exists in Muslim. See, for example, Hadith no. 58: collected by Muslim on the authority of Sufyân bin 'Uyainah and by Bukhârī on the authority of Mâlik. The following chart explains it further:
graph TD A[''Abdullah bin 'Umar'] --> B[Sâlim bin 'Abdullah] B --> C[Ibn Shihâb (Zuhri)] C --> D[Mâlik bin Anas] C --> E[Sufyân 'Uyainah] D --> F[''Abdullah bin Yusuf] E --> G[Zuhair bin Harb, Abu Bakr bin Abu Shaibah, 'Amr Nâqid] E --> H[Muhammad bin 'Abdullah bin Yazîd, Sahl bin Abu Sahl] F --> I[Imâm Bukhârî] G --> J[Imâm Muslim] H --> K[Imâm Ibn Mājah]
The diagram is a vertical genealogical chart. At the top is ''Abdullah bin 'Umar', connected by a vertical line to Sâlim bin 'Abdullah, which is connected by another vertical line to Ibn Shihâb (Zuhri). From Ibn Shihâb, a horizontal line branches out to Mâlik bin Anas on the left and Sufyân 'Uyainah on the right. From Mâlik bin Anas, a vertical line leads down to ''Abdullah bin Yusuf, which then leads to Imâm Bukhârî. From Sufyân 'Uyainah, a horizontal line branches out to two groups of narrators: Zuhair bin Harb, Abu Bakr bin Abu Shaibah, and 'Amr Nâqid on the left, and Muhammad bin 'Abdullah bin Yazîd, and Sahl bin Abu Sahl on the right. From the first group, a vertical line leads to Imâm Muslim. From the second group, a vertical line leads to Imâm Ibn Mājah.
It is clear from the foregoing chain that Muslim is closer to Ibn Mājah. Hence, he has been mentioned before the other.
[For some reasons, like explicit affirmation of a Mudallis (Truncated - immediate narrator not known) having directly heard from whom he is reporting, references from outside the Sound Six have also been given. See,
for example, Hadith no. 35, collected by Ahmad from Hadith of Muhammad bin Ishâq about whom it was affirmed that he had heard directly from him.]
• Two things should be noted about Tadlis (truncation): a. There are those who cannot be accused of truncation, any such charge against them being baseless and false, like Bukhârî, Muslim, Abu Qilâbah Jarmi, Makhl Shâmi, Zaid bin Aslam, Jubair bin Nufair, and Hammâd bin Usâmah. All of them are leading Hadith scholars and narrators of the First Level. Their Mu'an'an Ahâdith (in which the narrator relates using the preposition 'an', meaning 'from') are considered to have been heard directly by narrators unless there be a reason ruling it out. b. The Mu'an'an narrations, in Hadith books other than those of Bukhârî and Muslim, by narrators like Qatâdah, A'mash, Sufyân Thawri, and Abu Ishâq Sabî'î against whom it is proved that they did truncate, are considered Da'if (Weak) in case they did not hear them directly or any follow-up. Imâm Shâfî'î said: "We do not accept a Hadith from a Mudallis (truncater) until he says 'so-and-so told me' or 'I heard'"[1]. In the matter of Tadlis, his opinion is generally prevalent and preferred.
• Some scholars take the Mu'an'an narrations by Sufyân Thawri, Sufyân bin 'Uyainah, A'mash and others as Sound and those of Hasan Basri, Abu Zubair, and Abu Ishâq etc., as Weak. I do not see it as the right methodology. In my opinion, a decisive and categorical stand should be taken regarding this issue. See my treatise At-Ta'sis fi Mas'alah At-Tadlis for details.
• In case there is a difference of opinion among scholars about a narrator regarding his trustworthiness or weakness, finding it impossible to apply a single, consistent rule or reconcile between divergent opinions, I have always preferred the opinion of the majority of scholars.
• If a narrator is considered trustworthy by the lenient (Mutasûhil) experts in the science of Biographies like Tirmidhi, Ibn Hibbân, Hâkim, I have classified him as Unknown (Majhul), but if he is endorsed as trustworthy by two of them, for example, by Tirmidhi and Ibn Hibbân, I have classified him as good (Hasanul-Hadith) and truthful (Saduq). Note: Some scholars consider Imâm Tjîlî as lenient. I do not agree with this view but consider Imâm 'Tjîlî as moderate (Mu'tadil).
• When a narrator is classified as trustworthy or good, it endorses the
[1] Kitâbur-Risâlah, p. 380.
reliability of each narrator in the chain of the narration. For example, Nâfi' bin Mahmud Al-Maqdisi's narration has been graded Hasan (Good) or Sahih (Sound) by Dârûqutni and Baihaqi. Hence, he is trustworthy (Thiqah), according to them. See also Nashur-Râyah 1/49 and 3/264, and Silsilatus-Sahihah 7/16, Hadith no. 3007. It is wrong to classify such a narrator as Unknown (Majhul) or concealed (Mastur).
• While grading a Hadith as Sahih or Hasan, I have taken into account other Ahâdith as corroborators (Shawâhid) or follow-ups (Mutâbi'ât). So some Ahâdith have been graded Sahih or Hasan in the light of Shawâhid and Mutâbi'ât.
• Despite these methodologies of Hadith evaluation, errors may creep in. To err is human. But I declare hereby that I will not hesitate to recant if it is proved that there is error in my inquiry and the tracing of Ahâdith.
• While validating or invalidating narrators, I have invariably referred to original books of biographies of narrators and, after thorough investigation, selected the most correct and most preferable opinion. In case, the name of a preceding scholar of Hadith has been given without remark or note, it means I agree with him.
Abu Tâhir Zubair 'Ali Za'i
August, 2006.