How does a student of knowledge know that a hadith is anomalous, even though its apparent state is free from such anomaly?

The questioner : How does a student of knowledge know that a hadith is anomalous, even though its apparent state is free from such anomaly?

The Shaykh : There is no way for him to know that.

The questioner : The scholar, meaning the specialist in hadith, how does he know?

The Shaykh : You rephrased the question, but it still contains a distortion. Ah, do you have more clarification than what you mentioned?

The questioner : This is the question.

The Shaykh : If he is a specialist, he will know how to eat the shoulder. But if he is a student of knowledge, he will not know until he becomes a specialist in this science. The path to knowledge, the path to knowing the anomalous hadith—we spoke, I think, recently in some sessions about distinguishing between the anomalous hadith and the acceptable addition of a trustworthy narrator. Knowing this is done by tracing the narrations that revolve around a narrator from the narrators of the hadith, where the least that can be said is that it is possible for it to be anomalous. I gave an example recently of a hadith said by the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) to complete his first sentence: Then he said, with details mentioned in the narration: This hadith came in the two Sahihs, al-Bukhari and Muslim, and it has many corroborating narrations. In a narration in Sahih Muslim, instead of his saying (peace and blessings be upon him): it came with the wording: How does one know that the addition "they do not cauterize" is anomalous? By tracing the exits of this hadith. I recall that this hadith is in the two Sahihs from many routes from Hisham ibn Bashir, one of the great preservers. He has a defect, which is concealment of a defect in a chain. If he explicitly states the narration, his report is of the highest authenticity. Hisham ibn Bashir narrates this hadith from Abd al-Rahman, as I recall, ibn Abi Husayn, from Sa'id ibn Jubayr, from Abdullah ibn Abbas. The routes to Hisham multiplied in the two Sahihs and elsewhere. All the routes agreed on the first wording: "they do not seek healing by incantation." One route in Sahih Muslim said: "Sa'id ibn Mansur narrated to me, saying: Hisham narrated to me," and he mentioned the hadith with the story, and added to the text: "They do not cauterize and they do not seek healing by incantation." So the true researcher, when he traces these routes, is led to believe that Sa'id ibn Mansur singled out this addition, while all the trustworthy narrators who participated with Sa'id ibn Mansur in narrating the hadith from Hisham contradicted him and did not mention the addition "they do not cauterize." Then the hadith came outside the two Sahihs, for example in al-Hakim's al-Mustadrak, from the narration of Abdullah ibn Mas'ud. The hadith in the two Sahihs is from the narration of Abdullah ibn Abbas. The hadith also came in al-Hakim's al-Mustadrak from another separate route, completely separate from the first route and from Ibn Mas'ud, not from Ibn Abbas, with the wording: and not with the addition: By such tracing, the researcher knows the anomalous hadith. And as you see, not every researcher can do this, because it requires, first, knowledge of the principles of hadith, and distinguishing between the anomalous hadith and the acceptable addition of a trustworthy narrator. Second, it requires effort, patience, and struggle in tracing the narrations so that it becomes clear to him that the hadith is anomalous and not from the category of the acceptable addition of a trustworthy narrator. When is the addition acceptable? Suppose Sa'id ibn Mansur brought this addition, and then another trustworthy narrator and preserver like Sa'id ibn Mansur came and did not add this addition. Here we say, and both are equal in trustworthiness, precision, and preservation, that the addition of the trustworthy narrator is acceptable, because the one who added it added to someone equal to him in precision and preservation. But if he added to those who are above him in precision and preservation and in number, then it exits the circle of the acceptable addition of a trustworthy narrator and enters the circle of the anomalous hadith. This is the answer.
Please go ahead.