Their statement in the books of terminology: "Authentic, but not something about which certainty is established." What does that mean?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : In the books of some scholars of hadith terminology, when they mention the definition of an authentic hadith, they say "Authentic, but not something about which certainty is established". What is the meaning of this phrase, and how accurate is it?
The Shaykh : The intended meaning is clear. An authentic hadith, in reality, indicates the preponderance of probability regarding its establishment. So, any hadith narrated by a trustworthy person from a trustworthy person, until it reaches the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), from below the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), it is possible for them to make a mistake or an error, with the exception of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him), the one who conveys the message from the Lord of the Worlds. Because of this possibility, which no sane person can do except to accept it as a possibility, every narrator after the Messenger (peace be upon him) is subject to the possibility that he may have made a mistake in narrating this hadith. And because this is a possibility, the narration of an authentic hadith does not provide certainty and absolute conviction, but rather it provides the preponderance of probability. And what is preponderantly probable to be authentic is subject to the possibility that it is not authentic. But such a possibility is usually not given weight, because the legal rulings issued through the independent legal reasoning of the imams are also based on the preponderance of probability. If reliance on what is built on the preponderance of probability were discarded, legal rulings would be suspended, including the narration of authentic hadiths. Because no one absolutely says that a solitary, rare hadith from a trustworthy, upright, and precise narrator provides certainty. Because that would mean he is infallible from falling into error, and no Muslim says that.
However, if a solitary, rare hadith comes with a correct chain of narration according to the terminology of hadith scholars, and it is possible that it is not authentic in reality, that does not mean it is not permissible to rely on it because of that possibility. Because the mentioned possibility is only a theoretical matter, and the preponderance of probability is that it is authentic and that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said that hadith. So, what is the case, the original ruling is that it is used as evidence, unless the opposite is established, meaning it is established that one of the narrators made a mistake in this hadith. At that point, the matter reverses from being an authentic hadith to being an inauthentic hadith. In the first case, it was obligatory to act upon it. In the other case, it is not permissible to act upon it, because acting is obligatory based on the ruling that is preponderantly probable.
Some scholars exclude from the rule that an authentic hadith may be inauthentic in reality—and as we confirmed earlier, this is merely a possibility, a theoretical possibility, and the ruling is the obligation to use it as evidence—some scholars say that this authentic hadith, which is subject to the possibility of being inauthentic in reality, may be accompanied by circumstances that remove the previous possibility and allow the researcher to be certain that its establishment is established with certainty. A famous example of this is the hadiths that came in the two Sahihs and were accepted by the Muslim community, and nothing from them was criticized by the preservers. This type of authentic hadith provides certainty and conviction due to the consensus of the Muslim community on accepting them, despite their disagreement in acting upon them. This is the detailed answer to the previous question. Yes.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Be patient a little, yes.
The Shaykh : The intended meaning is clear. An authentic hadith, in reality, indicates the preponderance of probability regarding its establishment. So, any hadith narrated by a trustworthy person from a trustworthy person, until it reaches the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), from below the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), it is possible for them to make a mistake or an error, with the exception of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him), the one who conveys the message from the Lord of the Worlds. Because of this possibility, which no sane person can do except to accept it as a possibility, every narrator after the Messenger (peace be upon him) is subject to the possibility that he may have made a mistake in narrating this hadith. And because this is a possibility, the narration of an authentic hadith does not provide certainty and absolute conviction, but rather it provides the preponderance of probability. And what is preponderantly probable to be authentic is subject to the possibility that it is not authentic. But such a possibility is usually not given weight, because the legal rulings issued through the independent legal reasoning of the imams are also based on the preponderance of probability. If reliance on what is built on the preponderance of probability were discarded, legal rulings would be suspended, including the narration of authentic hadiths. Because no one absolutely says that a solitary, rare hadith from a trustworthy, upright, and precise narrator provides certainty. Because that would mean he is infallible from falling into error, and no Muslim says that.
However, if a solitary, rare hadith comes with a correct chain of narration according to the terminology of hadith scholars, and it is possible that it is not authentic in reality, that does not mean it is not permissible to rely on it because of that possibility. Because the mentioned possibility is only a theoretical matter, and the preponderance of probability is that it is authentic and that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said that hadith. So, what is the case, the original ruling is that it is used as evidence, unless the opposite is established, meaning it is established that one of the narrators made a mistake in this hadith. At that point, the matter reverses from being an authentic hadith to being an inauthentic hadith. In the first case, it was obligatory to act upon it. In the other case, it is not permissible to act upon it, because acting is obligatory based on the ruling that is preponderantly probable.
Some scholars exclude from the rule that an authentic hadith may be inauthentic in reality—and as we confirmed earlier, this is merely a possibility, a theoretical possibility, and the ruling is the obligation to use it as evidence—some scholars say that this authentic hadith, which is subject to the possibility of being inauthentic in reality, may be accompanied by circumstances that remove the previous possibility and allow the researcher to be certain that its establishment is established with certainty. A famous example of this is the hadiths that came in the two Sahihs and were accepted by the Muslim community, and nothing from them was criticized by the preservers. This type of authentic hadith provides certainty and conviction due to the consensus of the Muslim community on accepting them, despite their disagreement in acting upon them. This is the detailed answer to the previous question. Yes.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Be patient a little, yes.