Do some hadith scholars' preferences for a hadith being mawquf (stopping at a Companion) rely on an innate ability they possess, similar to the ability by which they distinguish the words of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) from those of others?

The questioner : May Allah bless you. My question to your eminence has two parts. The first is: Do some hadith scholars' preferences for a hadith being mawquf (stopping at a Companion) rely on an innate ability that develops in them, like the ability by which they distinguish the words of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) from those of others? Please allow me to mention an example for you to apply this to, so that the matter becomes clear through it.

The Shaykh : Please go ahead.

The questioner : For example, the hadith of Abu Ayyub (may Allah be pleased with him) that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said: It was narrated by the four [collections] except al-Tirmidhi. Ibn Hibban graded it authentic, and al-Nasa'i, Abu Hatim, al-Dhahli, al-Daraqutni, and al-Bayhaqi in al-'Ilal preferred it to be mawquf (stopping at a Companion). Does this preference for it being mawquf rely on an innate ability, or are there other reasons they rely on that practitioners who work with hadith can attain this honor or this status? The second part is that some scholars, regarding the statement of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) in some matters that it is obligatory, interpreted it according to the apparent meaning of the word, so that it becomes obligatory as the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said. They say that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) is the most eloquent and the most sincere of creation, and he addresses them with what they understand. I read from al-San'ani (may Allah have mercy on him) that he said: "Obligation is only mentioned in some hadiths to emphasize the recommended nature of the matter about which the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) says it is obligatory," as in the case of the Friday bath in his statement (peace and blessings be upon him): So I ask you to please explain the first matter regarding the preference for it being mawquf, and then clarify the correct view in the issue of the Prophet's (peace and blessings be upon him) statement that a certain matter is obligatory?

The Shaykh : Regarding the first matter, it is not hidden from you, if Allah wills, all of you, and you are students of knowledge, that preferring one narration over another has rules and criteria mentioned by the scholars of hadith in their terminology. This is the path by which one can adjudicate between one statement and another; there is no other path. So, preferring a mursal (missing the Companion link) over a muttasil (connected), or preferring a mawquf (stopping at a Companion) over a marfu' (traced to the Prophet), its reference, as is not hidden from you, is to the routes and the narrators. If a hadith comes, for example, as mursal through the route of a trustworthy narrator, and as connected through the route of another trustworthy narrator, one must look and compare the two trustworthy narrators. Whichever is more memorizing than the other, his narration is preferred, whether it is the connected one or the mursal one, whether it is the mawquf one or the marfu' one. Likewise, if the narrator is a single trustworthy person and is contradicted by other narrators, the narration of those others is preferred over that trustworthy person, whether it is, as we said, connection or omission, or stopping or tracing to the Prophet. But this rule, which is the only one we find in the science of hadith and its terminology, is deviated from by some of the great scholars from the imams of al-jarh wa al-ta'dil (the critique and vindication of narrators). In our view, when we apply this terminology and these rules, it may appear to us that the opposite of what they said is preferred. That is only for one of two reasons: either he judged based on the extent of the narrations he had access to and worked on preferring between them, or something occurred to him that cannot be pinned down; rather, we accept that from him because he is one of the imams from whom we receive knowledge. In other words, if we find a hadith and apply the rules to it, and connection is preferred in our view, and we find, for example, that Ibn Abi Hatim or Imam al-Daraqutni preferred omission, we are obligated in this case to apply the rules. If the rules help us to follow the statement of this imam, we do so, and that is light upon light. But if the rules only help us to contradict them, we must contradict them, and they have their own status that they reached. We know, first in many examples and second from some of their words, that there are matters in which not all scholars in the science of hadith can share. When Imam Ali ibn al-Madini was asked how he distinguishes the authentic hadith from others, he said: "Have you seen how the goldsmith distinguishes the sound dinar from the adulterated dinar?" Merely by casting his glance, the sound one is distinguished from the adulterated one for him. This means that there are specific observations that occur in the minds of these imams, by which they prefer one narration over another. But this is, in reality, like the jurisprudential issues to which some people incline, and then the hadith comes to us contradicting their ijtihad (independent legal reasoning), so we leave their ijtihad to them and we follow the text that we were commanded to follow. This means that we have excused ourselves to Allah by following the text, and we have excused them in their ijtihad, because they have a path and a source that may have been hidden from us. I am pleased, on this occasion, with what I read long ago in the biography of one of the students of Abu Yusuf, a student of Abu Hanifa (may Allah have mercy on them), and that is 'Isam al-Balkhi. This was a noble man, one of the few Hanafi scholars who contradicted his imams and all his companions. He would raise his hands in ruku' (the bowing of prayer) and in rising from it. He was asked: How is this? How do you contradict your imams and your scholars? He said: "Allah (Blessed and Exalted is He) obliges every person with what he has reached of knowledge and what he has of intellect and understanding. On the day we meet Him, He will not hold me accountable for the understanding of such-and-such an imam and such-and-such an imam, but He will hold me accountable for what my knowledge reached and encompassed. And I have come upon authentic hadiths that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) used to raise his hands in prayer. So if I am right, this is what my knowledge and ijtihad reached. And if I am wrong, my Lord will not say to me on the Day of Resurrection: Why did you contradict those imams? The one who contradicts may be wrong, and the one who contradicts may be right. But the one who is obligated must follow what the evidence reaches him." So, we answer regarding the first part of the question: There are established rules by their consensus that we know we must adhere to and apply. If it becomes clear to us within our scope that they contradicted these rules, then either these narrations that we took as a basis did not reach them, so we contradicted them, or they have a point of view that we did not perceive. And Allah knows best. Oh Allah...
This has no basis in the authentic Sunnah. Rather, the authentic Sunnah contradicts it. It was narrated in the two Sahihs from the hadith of Abdullah ibn Mas'ud (may Allah be pleased with him) that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) prayed the midday prayer with five rak'ahs one day. When he finished, it was said to him: Did you add to the prayer? He said: No. They said: You prayed five. So he prostrated the two prostrations of forgetfulness. Then he said (peace and blessings be upon him): إنما أنا بشر مثلكم أنسى كما تنسون فإذا نسيت فذكروني but I am a human being like you and liable to forget like you. So if I forget remind meSahih al-Bukhari 401 The transmission of the hadith narrated by Malik is only that "I forgot so I remembered," which contradicts this authentic hadith. Rather, it contradicts the general meaning of the statement of the Exalted: قل إنما أنا بشر مثلكم يوحى إليّ Say, "I am only a man like you, to whom has been revealed[Al-Kahf 18:110] This is what distinguished the Messenger (peace be upon him) from humans. Otherwise, he is afflicted with what humans are afflicted with: he gets hungry, he gets thirsty, he gets sick, and so on. And this increases his elevation and status with Allah (Blessed and Exalted is He), as he said (peace and blessings be upon him) in the authentic hadith: نحن معاشر الأنبياء أشد ابتلاء الأمثل فالأمثل We, the prophets, are the most severely tested, the most excellent being the most tested. Rather, this hadith, if the expression is correct, contradicts the Noble Qur'an in its statement: سَنُقْرِئُكَ فَلَا تَنْسَى الا ما شاء الله ⁽⁶⁾ We will make you recite, [O Muhammad], and you will not forget, ⁽⁷⁾ Except what Allah should will.[Al-A'la 87:6-7] So, if he forgets, it is by the explicit text of the Qur'an, and this meaning is supported explicitly in the Qur'an by the hadith in Sahih al-Bukhari that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) entered the mosque and heard a man reciting the Qur'an, so he said (peace and blessings be upon him): رحم الله فلانا لقد ذكرني آية كنت أنسيتها May Allah have mercy on so-and-so. He reminded me of a verse that I had forgotten.Sahih Ibn Hibban 3:47 So, that hadith you asked about is authentic because it came with a connected chain outside the Muwatta.

The questioner : Did I forget it, or did you forget it?

The Shaykh : I forgot it, yes.