❖ A Research-Based Evaluation of the Leniency in the Authentication by Al-Hakim al-Naysaburi, Al-Tirmidhi, and Ibn Hibban in Light of the Majority of Hadith Scholars
Source: Fatawa 'Ilmiyyah, Volume 1 – Principles, Takhrij, and Verification of Narrations, p. 572
❖ Question:
According to the majority of hadith scholars, what is the scholarly status of Al-Hakim’s grading of authenticity, Al-Tirmidhi’s classification of hadiths as "Hasan", and Ibn Hibban’s authentication? Were these scholars lenient in their assessments?
❖ Answer:
Al-Ḥamdulillāh Rabbi-l-‘Ālamīn, and peace and blessings be upon His trustworthy Messenger. To proceed:
The following lines present a detailed, research-based evaluation of the status of these three renowned hadith scholars, the criticisms leveled against them, and the opposing validations by the majority of hadith authorities.
❖ Imām Al-Ḥākim Al-Naysābūrī رحمه الله
✿ Scholarly Contributions:
◈ Renowned author of major works: Maʿrifat ʿUlūm al-Ḥadīth, Tārīkh Naysābūr, al-Madkhal, al-Mustadrak ʿala al-Ṣaḥīḥayn
◈ Year of death: 405 AH
✿ Criticism and Validation:
① Criticisms:
➊ Abu al-Faḍl Ibn al-Falakī al-Hamadhānī
— Statement: "وكان ابن البيِّـع يميلُ إلى التشيُّع"
— Source: Tārīkh Baghdād (5/474, No. 3024)
— Response: This criticism is rejected due to its reliance on an unknown narrator "some of our companions".
➋ Ibn Ṭāhir al-Maqdisī
— Statement: Al-Ḥākim authenticated the Ḥadīth al-Ṭayr, though it is not found in the Ṣaḥīḥayn; Ibn Ṭāhir declared it fabricated.
— Response:
– Ibn Ṭāhir was born after Al-Ḥākim’s death; thus his objection lacks direct authority.
– The Ḥadīth al-Ṭayr is established as Ḥasan or Ḥasan li-Ghayrih through multiple chains, such as that of Dāraqutnī which is ḥasan li-dhātih.
② Validations by Hadith Scholars:
➊ Khaṭīb Baghdādī: "وکان ثقة" (Tārīkh Baghdād, 5/473, No. 4024)
➋ Ibn al-Jawzī: "وکان ثقة" (al-Muntaẓam, 15/109, No. 3059)
➌ Ḥāfiẓ al-Dhahabī:
— "إمامٌ صدوق، لكنه يصحّح في مُستدرَكِهِ أحاديثَ ساقطة"
— "وكان من بحور العلم على تشيع قليل فيه" (Siyar Aʿlām al-Nubalāʾ, 17/1163; al-Nubalāʾ, 10/165)
➍ Ibn Kathīr, al-Samʿānī, Ibn Ḥajar, al-Subkī, Ibn al-Jazarī, Imām al-Bayhaqī, and others also affirmed Al-Ḥākim’s knowledge, integrity, and trustworthiness.
❖ Conclusion:
Al-Ḥākim al-Naysābūrī رحمه الله was a reliable and truthful Imām. However, he was at times lenient in his authentication of narrations. This was also acknowledged by Ḥāfiẓ al-Dhahabī, al-Sakhāwī, and others.
❖ Imām Abū ʿĪsā al-Tirmidhī رحمه الله
✿ Scholarly Status:
◈ A trustworthy and unanimously accepted hadith scholar
◈ Year of death: 279 AH
◈ Sources of validation: al-Irshād by al-Khalīlī (3/905), al-Thiqāt by Ibn Ḥibbān (9/153), Mīzān al-Iʿtidāl (2/678)
✿ Indications of Leniency:
Ḥāfiẓ al-Dhahabī’s statements:
➊ "فلهذا لا يعتمد العلماء على تصحيح الترمذي"
(Mīzān al-Iʿtidāl, 3/407; biography of Kathīr ibn ʿAbd Allāh al-ʿAwfī)
➋ "فلا يُغتَرّ بتحسين الترمذي. فعند المحاقَقَةِ غالبُها ضعاف"
(Mīzān al-Iʿtidāl, 4/416; biography of Yaḥyā ibn Yamān)
❖ Conclusion:
According to the majority of scholars, Imām al-Tirmidhī رحمه الله was trustworthy and possessed deep understanding. However, he occasionally displayed leniency in classifying weak narrations as Ḥasan or authentic.
❖ Imām Muḥammad ibn Ḥibbān al-Bustī رحمه الله
✿ Scholarly Status:
◈ A prominent ḥadīth scholar and author of al-Thiqāt and Ṣaḥīḥ Ibn Ḥibbān
◈ Year of death: 354 AH
✿ Criticism and Validation:
① Critics:
Abū al-Faḍl al-Sulaymānī, Yaḥyā ibn ʿAmmār, Abū Ismāʿīl al-Harawī, Abū ʿAlī al-Naysābūrī, Ibn Ṭāhir al-Maqdisī, etc.
— Some even labeled him a liar. However:
— Ḥāfiẓ al-Dhahabī:
"I saw a book by al-Sulaymānī containing disparagement of prominent scholars; his isolated views are not to be accepted."
(Siyar Aʿlām al-Nubalāʾ, 17/202)
② Endorsements:
➊ Khaṭīb al-Baghdādī: "كان ثقة ثبتا فاضلا فهما" (Tārīkh Dimashq, 55/189)
➋ Al-Ḥākim al-Naysābūrī (his student): Narrated from him and described his work as "Ṣaḥīḥ ʿalā sharṭ Muslim"
➌ Ḥāfiẓ al-Dhahabī: "إمام علامہ حافظ" (Siyar, 16/93; Tadhkirat al-Ḥuffāẓ, 3/920)
➍ Also affirmed by Ibn Mākūlā, al-Samʿānī, Yāqūt al-Ḥamawī, Ibn al-Athīr, Ibn Kathīr, al-Subkī, Ibn al-ʿImād, Ibn ʿAsākir, Faqīh Ṭabasī, etc.
✿ Details on Leniency:
Statements of Ḥāfiẓ al-Dhahabī and al-Sakhāwī:
— Ibn Ḥibbān was considered lenient in certain areas and even overly strict in others.
Shaykh ʿAbd al-Raḥmān al-Muʿallimī’s Classification of Ibn Ḥibbān’s Narrators:
➊ Clearly accurate and upright
➋ His teachers
➌ Narrators of numerous aḥādīth
➍ Those personally known to Ibn Ḥibbān
➎ Unknown or obscure narrators
❖ Conclusion:
Imām Ibn Ḥibbān رحمه الله was a trustworthy and truthful Imām. However, he was occasionally lenient in authenticating narrators who were unknown or of obscure background.
❖ Classification of Leniency, Strictness, and Moderation
✿ Categorization by Ḥāfiẓ al-Dhahabī:
◈ Overly Strict (متعنّت): Yaḥyā ibn Saʿīd al-Qaṭṭān, Ibn Maʿīn, Abū Ḥātim, Ibn Kharrāsh
◈ Moderate (معتدل): Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal, al-Bukhārī, Abū Zurʿah
◈ Lenient (متساہل): Al-Tirmidhī, Al-Ḥākim, Al-Dāraqutnī (occasionally)
(al-Mawqiẓah, p. 83; Dhikr Man Yuʿtamad Qawluhu fi al-Jarḥ wa al-Taʿdīl, p. 159)
✿ Statement of al-Sakhāwī:
◈ Al-Tirmidhī and Al-Ḥākim — Lenient
◈ Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal, Al-Dāraqutnī, Ibn ʿAdī — Moderate
(al-Iʿlān bi al-Tawḍīḥ, p. 168; al-Mutakallimūn fī al-Rijāl, p. 137)
❖ Final Summary of Research:
① Al-Ḥākim al-Naysābūrī, Al-Tirmidhī, and Ibn Ḥibbān, may Allah have mercy on them, were sometimes lenient in matters of authentication, grading, and validation.
② Their individual judgments cannot be solely relied upon unless corroborated by other reliable hadith scholars.
③ Preference must be given to the validations and criticisms of the majority of hadith scholars to avoid contradiction or lack of caution in the science of rijāl (narrator evaluation).
ھذا ما عندي واللہ أعلم بالصواب
