Is a hasan li-ghayrihi hadith, once established as hasan li-ghayrihi, cited as evidence in the same rank as a sahih li-dhati hadith, such that it is used for deduction?

The questioner : All right — may Allah reward you — you previously asked a question and the answer was very brief... You asked me: Is a hasan li-ghayrihi hadith, once established as hasan li-ghayrihi, cited as evidence in the same rank as a sahih li-dhati hadith; meaning, is it used for deduction in legal rulings, in creed, and in all matters, and is it of the same degree of deduction, or not?

The Shaykh : Naturally, the answer in brief is: Yes, and in detail: No; because your question stated "in the same rank," so you will understand the difference in what follows. If someone had not expanded your question but posed it in the following form: Is a single (ahad) sahih hadith cited as evidence in legal rulings in the same rank as a famous (mashhur), widespread (mustafid), or mass-transmitted (mutawatir) hadith? What would the answer be? That is the answer. So what do you see... the answer?

The questioner : ... It passed by him.

The Shaykh: Yes.

The questioner : ... .

The Shaykh : The question...? I say: If a questioner had expanded your previous question and said: Is citing a sahih hadith that is ahad, whether it is a strange (gharib) single narration, or famous (mashhur), or widespread (mustafid), or a mass-transmitted (mutawatir) hadith; is citing all these types of sahih hadiths acceptable in legal rulings without dispute? Are these hadiths of one rank in strength of citation? Naturally, the answer will be: No; is that not so? And I say my answer just mentioned: No, but when we say: No, does it detract from citing the hadith that is below the highest of these degrees, which is the strange (gharib) individual sahih hadith? The answer will also be: No, but it does not invalidate citing it, however it is not in the rank of citing a mass-transmitted (mutawatir) hadith. Likewise, the answer regarding your specific question between the hasan and the sahih hadith.

The questioner : Based on what precedes; if the following question came: If the implication (mafhum) of a sahih li-dhati hadith conflicts with the explicit text (manthuq) of a hasan li-ghayrihi hadith; do we still say that the explicit text (manthuq) of the hasan li-ghayrihi hadith is preferred?

The Shaykh : Yes, and that is the meaning of al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar’s statement in "Sharh al-Nukhba": If two conflicting hadiths from the category of acceptable (maqbul) come, they must be reconciled in one of the ways of reconciliation. The acceptable is the hasan... reconciliation between them is obligatory. It is known in the principles of jurisprudence (usul al-fiqh) that the indication of the explicit text (manthuq) is stronger than the indication of the implication (mafhum). It is known from the principles of jurisprudence that the indication of the explicit text (manthuq) is stronger than the indication of the implication (mafhum). In terminology, it is said: If two hadiths from the category of acceptable come, the hasan is acceptable, and the sahih is acceptable a fortiori; if the indication of the explicit text (manthuq) of the sahih conflicts with the hasan in the text; and the indication of the hasan is explicit text (manthuq) and the indication of the sahih is implication (mafhum); then there is no doubt that the indication of the explicit text (manthuq) here, from the jurisprudential perspective, takes precedence over the indication of the implication (mafhum) from this same perspective. And in hadith — hadith terminology — the hasan is equated with the sahih in terms of citation, and the answer is as previously stated. Clear?

The questioner : Yes. This hasan li-ghayrihi hadith...

The Shaykh : Whether it is hasan li-ghayrihi or hasan li-dhati, because I think it is not hidden from you why the hadith scholars agreed to name a type of hadith "hasan"? That is because they said the hasan hadith is: one in which all the conditions of the sahih hadith are present, but the condition of precision (dabt) that is required to be present in the sahih hadith was not fully present in the hasan hadith, rather one of its narrators had less precision (dabt) than the narrator of the sahih hadith; so to indicate the rank of this narrator for the hadith, they called his hadith the hasan hadith. And this treatment is in psychological matters that a person feels completely. We, for example, do not hesitate that a hadith narrated by Abu Bakr al-Siddiq is not like a hadith narrated by a Bedouin. And as some of the Tabi'un said — may Allah pardon us and him — when the hadith of Wa'il ibn Hujr was presented to him that he saw the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) when he entered the prayer he raised his hands, and when he bowed he raised his hands, and when he said: "Allah hears the one who praises Him" he raised his hands; contrary to what Abdullah ibn Mas'ud narrated, he said: "Shall I not pray for you the prayer of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him)?" So he raised his hands and then did not return to it.
It was said to Ibrahim al-Nakha'i: So where are you from the hadith of Wa'il which affirms raising the hands at other than the takbir of ihram? He answered: "We would not leave the narration of Ibn Mas'ud for a Bedouin if... on his heels."
This is undoubtedly a diminishment of the value of this Companion, but there is no doubt or doubt that we cannot equate Wa'il ibn Hujr with Abu Bakr al-Siddiq. The narration of Abu Bakr al-Siddiq is of the utmost strength, whereas the narration of Wa'il is sufficient for us to be authentic. So the matter is these things that are not hidden from researchers. If the speech comes about the hasan hadith, it is the one in which a narrator is not of that firmness in precision (dabt), so referring to this simple, easy difference, they called his hadith hasan. Then they agreed, for further clarification and alertness, to divide both the sahih and the hasan into sahih li-ghayrihi and hasan li-ghayrihi; expressing these differences that the established researcher in this science feels. But these differences, as we gave an example just now with the narration of Abu Bakr and Wa'il al-Yamani, did not make the disparity between the two men such that it carries us to drop the citation of Wa'il's hadith; likewise, no difference found between a hasan li-dhati hadith and another hasan li-ghayrihi hadith carries us to do so; because the trust we felt in our souls from the narrator's narration of the hadith whose narration is hasan is the same trust that is present in the soul when we find paths for the hadith that bring it to the rank of hasan li-ghayrihi. And they are nothing but verbal conventions that lead to a psychological meaning known to the people of knowledge and fitrah.
The Shaykh : This is the answer to what you asked.