What is the difference between a corroborating narration (shahid) and a supporting chain (mutaba'ah)?

The Shaykh : And upon you be peace, and the mercy of Allah and His blessings.

The questioner : How are you, Shaykh?

The Shaykh : Praise be to Allah, I am well.

The questioner : May you all be well, if Allah wills.

The Shaykh: May Allah reward you.

The questioner : May Allah reward you with good and preserve you.

The Shaykh : May Allah keep you safe.

The questioner : Our Shaykh, I would like to ask a question about the difference between a corroborating narration and a supporting chain, regarding a specific detail.

The Shaykh: Yes.

The questioner : And that is: if a hadith comes from another Companion with the same wording, what do we call the hadith?

The Shaykh : A corroborating narration (shahid).

The questioner : They call it a corroborating narration (shahid).

The Shaykh: Yes.

The questioner : Okay, if it comes with different wording, our Shaykh.

The Shaykh : That makes no difference; if it comes with different wording, the important thing is the meaning. So if that wording or meaning comes from another Companion, it is a corroborating narration (shahid).

The questioner: May Allah reward you with good.

The Shaykh: Yes.

The questioner : Okay, if a hadith scholar rules on the first scenario that it is a supporting chain (mutaba'ah).

The Shaykh : A supporting chain (mutaba'ah) is more precise than a corroborating narration (shahid).

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : Meaning, every supporting chain (mutaba'ah) is a corroborating narration (shahid), but not every corroborating narration (shahid) is a supporting chain (mutaba'ah), except with precise scrutiny. For example, if a chain comes from one Companion... there is weakness... a trustworthy narrator, and so on, up to that Companion... from one Companion, and there is a weak man in the chain. Let us give an example: this weak man narrates from Sa'id from Abu Hurayrah. Then it comes from another weak man from al-Zuhri from Sa'id from Abu Hurayrah. This other weak man is a supporting chain (mutaba'ah) for the first weak man. But if this hadith came... and came from another weak man from Ibn 'Umar, for example, in the chain from Ibn 'Umar, this is considered a clear corroborating narration (shahid), is that clear?

The questioner : ... The thing I am asking about is the difference of the Companion. The difference of the Companion is not that the wording of the text is with the same wording, but rather the opposite. What do they call it a corroborating narration (shahid)?

The Shaykh : My brother, I have answered you, may Allah bless you. Whether the wording matches the first wording or not, it is a corroborating narration (shahid), because it strengthens the first narration.

The questioner : May Allah reward you with good.

The Shaykh : And even if the second wording differs from the first, the meaning is the same, so it is a corroborating narration (shahid) in any case.

The questioner : May Allah bless you.

The Shaykh: Is it clear?

The questioner : If the meaning is the same with different wording.

The Shaykh : Yes, it is also considered a corroborating narration (shahid).

The questioner : For the first one.

The Shaykh : For the first one.

The questioner : May Allah reward you with good.

The Shaykh : May Allah preserve you.

The questioner : Our Shaykh, by Allah, I do not know; I mean, I understood the answer to it, but if the hadith scholar calls the first scenario a supporting chain (mutaba'ah), do you criticize him?

The Shaykh : My brother, the issue is one of terminology.

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : We criticize him in that he went beyond the terminology.

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : And that is all.

The questioner : May Allah reward you.

The Shaykh : And may He reward you.

The questioner : ... May Allah reward you with good.

The Shaykh : And may Allah protect you, if Allah wills.

The questioner: Peace be upon you.

The Shaykh: And upon you peace.