Methods of Reading Hadith Books
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
Your Eminence! Regarding the study of the Six Books—al-Bukhari, Muslim, and the Sunan—should one read them only, or read them with commentary, or read one book, for example, with commentary and read the others only? Or how should it be done?
Reading the books of hadith, may Allah bless you, falls into two categories: It is a reading that enables a person to know the authenticity of a hadith and its lack thereof. This depends on knowing the conditions of the narrators and their biographies in order to know who is accepted and who is not, and knowing their history to know whether the chain of narration is broken or unbroken. For example, if a person narrates from so-and-so, and we know that the one who narrated from him was born after his death, we know that the chain is broken. Therefore, it is necessary to know the history of the narrators. It is also necessary to know the establishment of the meeting between the one who narrated and the one from whom he narrated, because a narrator may conceal a defect by narrating from someone of his era whom he did not actually hear from.
Therefore, the one who seeks the knowledge of hadith in this manner must read the Six Books with their chains of narration and investigate their men. We know that scholars differ greatly regarding the men. You will find that this hadith scholar, for example, says that Imam Ahmad called him trustworthy, while Yahya ibn Ma'in says he is a denouncer of hadith, for example, and a third says he is abandoned.
This issue may confuse the student of knowledge. What is his position if he sees the memorizers and imams speaking about this man in differing terms? We look at the text of the hadith. The text may be anomalous, contradicting the authentic hadiths. Then we know that those who spoke about this man with criticism are more correct than those who spoke about him with vindication, because his hadith is denounced. Indeed, a hadith may have a sound chain in terms of its men and the connection of the chain, but the text may be denounced or anomalous. It may be anomalous because it contradicts the authentic hadiths, in which case it is rejected.
In conclusion, the one who seeks the knowledge of hadith for the purpose of establishing a hadith must pay attention to the men, the dates of their lives, and what people have said about them.
As for the one who seeks hadith for the sake of understanding hadith, he has another path; he is not required to do what is required of the first person. In fact, he may suffice with the hadith text alone. If it is in Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim, the soul is at ease with it. If it is in other collections, it suffices for him to say, for example, "So-and-so authenticated it" or "So-and-so, one of the reliable memorizers, authenticated it," even if he did not review the chain of narration.And the most important thing in the Noble Qur'an and the Prophetic Sunnah is understanding the text, knowing it, what is derived from it, and what follows from it, as the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said: "Often the one who conveys a message understands it better than the one who heard it, and often the one who carries knowledge of jurisprudence is not a jurist."And "Whoever Allah wishes good for, He grants him understanding in the religion." .
The questioner: So, must the student of hadith knowledge first begin by studying the books of terminology and men?The Shaykh: Yes.
He must have knowledge of terminology if he wants it in the first manner.
The questioner: And the second approach?The Shaykh: It is not necessary, because he may suffice, for example, if al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar authenticated it, or so-and-so, one of the trusted imams and scholars of hadith, authenticated it. That is sufficient. He does not go to look, for example, at the chain of narration, because he has no knowledge of the terminology of the scholars in that regard.
The questioner: And what about the derivations from hadith and the benefits?The Shaykh: A person may be weak in derivations while being strong in tracing hadiths to their sources. Therefore, you will find a difference between the jurists in their derivation of rulings from hadith and the hadith scholars.
Reading the books of hadith, may Allah bless you, falls into two categories: It is a reading that enables a person to know the authenticity of a hadith and its lack thereof. This depends on knowing the conditions of the narrators and their biographies in order to know who is accepted and who is not, and knowing their history to know whether the chain of narration is broken or unbroken. For example, if a person narrates from so-and-so, and we know that the one who narrated from him was born after his death, we know that the chain is broken. Therefore, it is necessary to know the history of the narrators. It is also necessary to know the establishment of the meeting between the one who narrated and the one from whom he narrated, because a narrator may conceal a defect by narrating from someone of his era whom he did not actually hear from.
Therefore, the one who seeks the knowledge of hadith in this manner must read the Six Books with their chains of narration and investigate their men. We know that scholars differ greatly regarding the men. You will find that this hadith scholar, for example, says that Imam Ahmad called him trustworthy, while Yahya ibn Ma'in says he is a denouncer of hadith, for example, and a third says he is abandoned.
This issue may confuse the student of knowledge. What is his position if he sees the memorizers and imams speaking about this man in differing terms? We look at the text of the hadith. The text may be anomalous, contradicting the authentic hadiths. Then we know that those who spoke about this man with criticism are more correct than those who spoke about him with vindication, because his hadith is denounced. Indeed, a hadith may have a sound chain in terms of its men and the connection of the chain, but the text may be denounced or anomalous. It may be anomalous because it contradicts the authentic hadiths, in which case it is rejected.
In conclusion, the one who seeks the knowledge of hadith for the purpose of establishing a hadith must pay attention to the men, the dates of their lives, and what people have said about them.
As for the one who seeks hadith for the sake of understanding hadith, he has another path; he is not required to do what is required of the first person. In fact, he may suffice with the hadith text alone. If it is in Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim, the soul is at ease with it. If it is in other collections, it suffices for him to say, for example, "So-and-so authenticated it" or "So-and-so, one of the reliable memorizers, authenticated it," even if he did not review the chain of narration.And the most important thing in the Noble Qur'an and the Prophetic Sunnah is understanding the text, knowing it, what is derived from it, and what follows from it, as the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said: "Often the one who conveys a message understands it better than the one who heard it, and often the one who carries knowledge of jurisprudence is not a jurist."And "Whoever Allah wishes good for, He grants him understanding in the religion." .
The questioner: So, must the student of hadith knowledge first begin by studying the books of terminology and men?The Shaykh: Yes.
He must have knowledge of terminology if he wants it in the first manner.
The questioner: And the second approach?The Shaykh: It is not necessary, because he may suffice, for example, if al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar authenticated it, or so-and-so, one of the trusted imams and scholars of hadith, authenticated it. That is sufficient. He does not go to look, for example, at the chain of narration, because he has no knowledge of the terminology of the scholars in that regard.
The questioner: And what about the derivations from hadith and the benefits?The Shaykh: A person may be weak in derivations while being strong in tracing hadiths to their sources. Therefore, you will find a difference between the jurists in their derivation of rulings from hadith and the hadith scholars.