Is there a difference between the two expressions: "This is a hasan hadith" and "This is a hasan gharib hadith according to al-Tirmidhi"?

The Shaykh : It is valid for other reasons, or hasan for other reasons. If a scholar, for example al-Tirmidhi, says of a hadith that it is hasan, and this is one of the rare and subtle points that most scholars, and indeed many hadith scholars, do not notice. If al-Tirmidhi says of a hadith that it is hasan, he means its chain of narration is weak. Have you heard this? If he says of a hadith that it is hasan, he means its chain of narration is weak.

The questioner : Meaning it did not reach the level of validity, meaning?

The Shaykh : No, if he says, I say if he says of a hadith that it is hasan, he means its chain of narration is weak. Do not make a leap like a gazelle, may Allah reward you. Meaning it is not valid, meaning its chain of narration is not hasan. It is not valid. If al-Tirmidhi says of a hadith that it is hasan, he means the hadith that al-Tirmidhi graded as hasan has a weak chain of narration. How is this? This is a technical term, contrary to when he says of another hadith that it is a hasan gharib hadith. In that case, he means a hasan hadith in terms of its chain of narration. The word gharib specified the intended meaning of his saying hasan. But if the word hasan is stripped of the word gharib, he means the text is hasan but the chain of narration is weak. By what did this grading of hasan come about? From his knowledge that this text has corroborating narrations and other routes that elevated it from the weakness it had from this chain of narration. Therefore, for that reason, hadith scholars said: If a student of knowledge comes across a hadith with a weak chain of narration, is it permissible for him to say it is a weak hadith? They said, and they said, they said it is not permissible, because it may have another chain of narration, either that other chain of narration is hasan in itself, or valid in itself, or at least makes this hadith with its weak chain of narration hasan or valid for other reasons. Therefore, one should not independently say that this is a weak hadith, but rather say that the hadith has a weak chain of narration. Then they made an exception and said: Except for a scholar who is well-versed in the science of hadith, who is comprehensive, may Allah will it, in the routes of hadith, and then he finds for this hadith only this chain of narration. Only for such a person is it permissible to say this is a weak hadith.

The questioner : I am sorry for the interruption.

The Shaykh : Please, there is no interruption.

The questioner : What is the difference between saying that this hadith is hasan and saying that this hadith is hasan sahih as al-Tirmidhi stated? He is the one who brought the word hasan, and al-Tirmidhi is the one who brought these technical terms?

The Shaykh : Yes, it is a specific technical term of al-Tirmidhi.

The questioner : So when we say this is a hasan hadith, we say hasan, not for itself and not for other reasons, a hasan hadith, and when we say this is a hasan sahih hadith. Is there a difference between the two?

The Shaykh : The matter is as I said, that al-Tirmidhi brought this technical term. But before we mention what the scholars said about this technical term, we must mention, and remembrance benefits the believers, that the correct expression is to say that al-Tirmidhi popularized this technical term, not that he brought it, because he was preceded to it. He was preceded to it by his teacher al-Bukhari, the author of al-Sahih. So in many of his books other than al-Sahih, he says of some hadiths that they are hasan sahih. But the one who popularized it was Imam al-Tirmidhi. What does he intend?
The Shaykh: I answer with a brief answer, which is my opinion, and Allah knows best. Why? For two reasons. The first reason is that al-Tirmidhi himself did not express this technical term that he narrated and popularized. And the second and final reason is that the scholars did not provide a sufficient and satisfying answer that reassures the soul and opens the chest. Some of them said: Hasan means its chain of narration is valid. Some of them said: Hasan in the final result, but the meaning is slightly different. Hasan in ruling, meaning it is acted upon, and its chain of narration is valid. Unlike when he says a hadith is sahih, which indicates that its chain of narration is valid but it was not acted upon. Some of them said: Hasan with regard to the chain of narration.

The questioner : ...

The Shaykh : No, it has two chains of narration. The one for which he said hasan sahih has two chains of narration. So by virtue of one it is hasan, and by virtue of the other it is sahih. And on this basis, who are they? They said: So what al-Tirmidhi said in a hadith as hasan sahih is stronger than what he said as sahih. But if he said hasan sahih, it means it has two chains of narration, one of which is sahih, but he added to it another chain of narration that is hasan. So it is more authentic than what he said was sahih, because the sahih has one chain, and this has a sahih chain and another hasan chain, so it is stronger. But this was refuted or contradicted by the fact that al-Tirmidhi often combines three expressions or three terms and says: Hasan sahih gharib. And the meaning of gharib is that it has only one chain of narration. So if this is the case, it is refuted...