❀ Ḥujjiyyah (Authority) of Ḥasan li-Ghayrihi: Statements, Practice, and Clarifications by Hadith Scholars ❀
❖ Question:
Respected Shaykh! According to the hadith scholars, is Ḥasan li-Ghayrihi considered authoritative (ḥujjah)? Besides Shaykh al-Albani (رحمه الله), which other hadith scholars have accepted it as such?
✔ Answer by: Shaykh Khidr Hayat ḥafiẓahullāh
◈ The Validity of Ḥasan li-Ghayrihi According to the Majority of Hadith Scholars
According to all hadith scholars—except a few contemporary ones—Ḥasan li-Ghayrihi is considered authoritative (ḥujjah).
As far as we are aware, there is no clear statement from any classical hadith scholar that denies the authority of Ḥasan li-Ghayrihi.
◈ Important Clarification
Since Ḥasan li-Ghayrihi refers to a ḥadīth that is weak (ḍaʿīf) but reaches the level of ḥasan due to supporting evidences and corroborative chains, the following points must be noted:
① It is essential to understand which types of weakness (ḍaʿf) can be reinforced, and which cannot.
② Not every weak narration becomes Ḥasan li-Ghayrihi.
③ Just as there are differences among scholars regarding the authentication (ṣaḥīḥ) or weakening (ḍaʿīf) of narrations, differences can also exist in declaring something as ḥasan.
④ However, such differences do not mean that any scholar rejects the authority of Ḥasan li-Ghayrihi altogether.
⑤ Similar to how, if someone does not consider a particular ḥadīth to be ṣaḥīḥ, it does not imply that they deny the authority of ṣaḥīḥ ḥadīths in general.
✔ Practical Application and Explicit Statements from Hadith Scholars
➊ Imām Ibn Khuzaymah (d. 311 AH)
He states:
“I do not include the narrations of Ibn Lahiʿah in this book if he narrates alone; I only included this narration because Jābir ibn Ismāʿīl is also present in the chain.”
(Ṣaḥīḥ Ibn Khuzaymah 1/75, ḥadīth 146)
Hāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar says about Jābir ibn Ismāʿīl:
"Maqbūl when corroborated; otherwise, he is soft in ḥadīth."
➡ Both narrators are individually weak, but the narration was accepted based on mutual reinforcement and included in Ṣaḥīḥ Ibn Khuzaymah.
➋ Imām al-Bayhaqī
After narrating reports on combining prayers (jamʿ bayn al-ṣalātayn), he writes:
“…If it was witnessed in written records, then it is connected (mawṣūl); otherwise, when combined with the first, it becomes strong…”
(Al-Sunan al-Kubrā 3/240, ḥadīth 5560)
Elsewhere he states:
“However, its supporting narrations strengthen it.”
(Al-Sunan al-Kubrā 6/361, ḥadīth 12243)
And:
“…But when combined with the narration of Abū Qatādah, it gains some strength.”
(Maʿrifat al-Sunan wa al-Āthār 3/438)
➌ Ibn ʿAbd al-Barr (d. 463 AH)
He says:
“Al-Ḥakam is weak and has strange narrations, and is not relied upon, but what has preceded supports this narration.”
(Al-Tamhīd 23/410)
◈ Statements of Early and Later Scholars
➊ Imām Sufyān al-Thawrī (d. 161 AH)
“I write ḥadīths in three categories: those which I practice upon, those I consider for evaluation, and those I write only for identification.”
(Al-Jāmiʿ li Akhlāq al-Rāwī 2/193)
➡ The second category refers to Ḥasan li-Ghayrihi.
➋ Sufyān ibn ʿUyaynah (d. 198 AH)
He said:
“We did not find anything to support this ḥadīth; it only comes from this one chain.”
He also narrates from his teacher Ismāʿīl ibn Umayyah:
“Do you have anything to support this narration with?”
(Al-Sunan al-Kubrā by al-Bayhaqī 2/384)
➌ Imām Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal (d. 241 AH)
He said:
“Sometimes we are in need of narrations from weak narrators, but the rejected one (munkar) remains rejected.”
(Al-ʿIlal by al-Marwadhī, ed. Ṣubḥī al-Sāmarāʾī, p. 120)
He further said:
“I do not consider Ibn Lahiʿah’s ḥadīths to be proof, yet I write many of them for consideration, and they strengthen one another.”
(Al-Jāmiʿ by al-Khaṭīb 2/193)
◈ Clarifications from Shaykh al-Islām Ibn Taymiyyah (d. 728 AH)
“…In such cases, one benefits from the narration of an unknown or weak-memory narrator, or from a mursal narration and the like…”
(Muqaddimah fī Uṣūl al-Tafsīr, p. 29)
“If two narrations have slight weakness, they can support each other…”
(Al-Fatāwā al-Kubrā 6/241)
➡ This is essentially the methodology of Ḥasan li-Ghayrihi.
◈ Views of Other Scholars
➊ Ibn al-Qayyim (d. 751 AH)
“The term ‘weak’ in the usage of earlier scholars is not the same as in the terminology of later scholars…”
(Al-Furūsiyyah al-Muḥammadiyyah, 1/203)
➋ Hāfiẓ al-Dhahabī (d. 748 AH)
“…Because it comes from two or more weak chains, each one supports the other.”
(Siyar Aʿlām al-Nubalāʾ, 13/214)
➌ Al-Sakhāwī
“…Say: It is weak, meaning specifically with this chain…”
(Fatḥ al-Mughīth 1/347)
◈ Clear Definitions of Ḥasan li-Ghayrihi
➊ Imām al-Tirmidhī (d. 279 AH)
“Every ḥadīth that is narrated… is ḥasan in our view.”
(Al-ʿIlal al-Ṣaghīr by al-Tirmidhī, p. 758)
➡ Ibn al-Ṣalāḥ identified this as the definition of Ḥasan li-Ghayrihi.
(ʿUlūm al-Ḥadīth, p. 30)
➋ Imām al-Nawawī (d. 676 AH)
“It is like a ṣaḥīḥ narration in that it is used as proof…”
(Irshād Ṭullāb al-Ḥaqāʾiq 1/141)
In response to objections, he writes:
“…If one has explicitly stated this, then even more so should this not be weakened generally…”
(Irshād al-Ṭullāb 1/146–148)
➌ Other Scholars Who Defined Ḥasan li-Ghayrihi
- Al-Biqāʿī: (Al-Nukat al-Wafiyyah 1/76)
- Ibn Ḥajar: (Nuzhah al-Naẓar, ed. al-Raḥīlī, p. 129–130)
- Ibn al-Ḥanbalī: (Qafw al-Athar, p. 50)
- Imām al-Ṣanʿānī: (Tawḍīḥ al-Afkār 1/155)
✔ Conclusion
Ḥasan li-Ghayrihi is a well-established principle of ḥujjiyyah among the hadith scholars.
Numerous early and later scholars have either explicitly acknowledged its authority or acted upon it practically in their compilations and verdicts.
For further elaboration and responses to objections, refer to the article:
"Ḥasan li-Ghayrihi is Authoritative."
