Explanation of his statement: "This is a concise work that encompasses the foundational hadith evidence for rulings. I have clarified it thoroughly so that whoever memorizes it will stand out among his peers, and so that the beginner student can benefit from it and the advanced seeker will not be without it."

The reader: "I have clarified it thoroughly so that whoever memorizes it will stand out among his peers, and so that the beginner student can benefit from it and the advanced seeker will not be without it. I have also indicated, after each hadith, which of the Imams narrated it, in order to advise the Muslim community,
By 'the seven,' I mean Ahmad, al-Bukhari, Muslim, Abu Dawud, al-Tirmidhi, al-Nasa'i, and Ibn Majah. By 'the six,' I mean all except Ahmad. By 'the five,' I mean all except al-Bukhari and Muslim. I may also say 'the four and Ahmad.' By 'the four,' I mean all except the first three. By 'the three,' I mean all except those and the last one. By 'agreed upon,' I mean al-Bukhari and Muslim, and I may not mention anyone else with them. Anything else is clear. I named it: *Bulugh al-Maram min Adillat al-Ahkam*. I ask Allah not to make what we have learned a burden upon us, and to grant us the ability to act upon what pleases Him, (Glorified and Exalted is He)".

The Shaykh : In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful.
We have previously established that the foundation of the evidence for rulings is the Qur'an, and that the Sunnah completes it. We have also established that one who looks at the evidence in the Qur'an does not need to investigate its chain of narration, because it is mass-transmitted and known with certainty. However, one who looks at the Sunnah needs two things:
The first is that it is established from the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him and his family). The second is that the text indicates the ruling. Therefore, if someone argues with you using a verse from the Qur'an, what do you ask him for?
The student: The mode of indication.

The Shaykh : I say: What is the mode of indication? And if someone argues with you using the Sunnah, you first ask him for the validity of the transmission. If the transmission is valid, then I discuss with him the validity of the indication. So, for this reason, the scholars (may Allah have mercy on them) needed to look at the narrators from two angles:
The first angle is regarding trustworthiness, which relates to memory and integrity. The second is regarding continuity, which relates to knowing the dates of their lives, birth and death, so that the chain is not broken. So, looking at the conditions of narrators is from two angles: from the side of trustworthiness, which relates to two things: integrity and memory. Many things that contradict this, such as causes for criticizing a hadith, fall under these. And the second, what is it?
The student: The continuity of the chain.

The Shaykh : From the side of the continuity of the chain. Therefore, it is necessary to know their births and deaths so that we can distinguish the continuous chain from the non-continuous one. Then we discussed the first introduction of the author (may Allah have mercy on him).
Then he said: "As for what follows, this is a concise work that encompasses". The scholars said that a concise work is one that has few words but much meaning. This concise work, "encompasses the foundational hadith evidence for the Shari'ah rulings". The author (may Allah have mercy on him) informed us that he did not include all the hadith evidence, but only selected the foundations, meaning those that indicate what frequently occurs among people in their acts of worship. And his saying: "hadith" is an attribution to hadith, to distinguish it from Qur'anic evidence, because the author did not mention any Qur'anic evidence in this book. For example, al-Bukhari (may Allah have mercy on him) mentions some Qur'anic evidence as well as hadith evidence. As for Muslim, for example, he does not mention any Qur'anic evidence. The author did not mention any Qur'anic evidence, but limited himself to some of the hadith evidence.
And his saying: "for the Shari'ah rulings". "Rulings" is the plural of "ruling." A ruling is establishing something for something, either by negation or affirmation. This ruling, establishing something for something by negation or affirmation. For example, if we say "it is not lawful to eat carrion," this is establishing a ruling. Is it negation or affirmation?
The student: Negation.

The Shaykh : Negation. And if he says "Allah has made sale lawful," this is an affirmative ruling. So, a ruling is establishing something for something, either by negation or affirmation.
And his saying: "Shari'ah" excludes three types of rulings: customary and rational, leaving only the Shari'ah rulings. Shari'ah rulings are those received from the Shari'ah: the Book, the Sunnah, consensus, and analogical reasoning. Rational evidence is received from the intellect. Customary evidence is received from experience. These are customary evidences. What is the source of the lawful, the forbidden, the obligatory, the recommended, and the disliked?
The student: From the Shari'ah.

The Shaykh : From the Shari'ah. That a part is less than the whole and the whole is greater, these are rational evidences. What is taken from custom, such as saying "sukhna-jabin is a laxative for the stomach," or something similar from custom, meaning people have accustomed themselves to the fact that whoever consumes this thing will have their stomachs loosened or become loose. So, rulings are three categories: Shari'ah and what else?
The student: And rational...

The Shaykh : And rational and customary. Then, Shari'ah rulings are either practical or theoretical. What is based on belief is theoretical, and what is based on action, whether verbal or physical, is practical. He says: "I have clarified it thoroughly". "I have clarified it" means I removed all complexity from it, because clarifying a thing means purifying it. Thoroughly, according to his ability (may Allah have mercy on him). "So that whoever memorizes it will stand out among his peers". "So that whoever memorizes it"—the author indicated with this word that we should memorize this work, because it is concise, encompasses the foundational hadith evidence, and explains the rulings and the grades of the hadiths.
And his saying: "among his peers". "Peers" is the plural of "peer," meaning companion. "Stand out" means having distinction, elevation, and rising above others. This is undoubtedly the case; if a person memorizes this text, he will be without need for much of the evidence, because it encompasses most of the evidence people need. However, it requires review, because he (may Allah have mercy on him) sometimes mentions the tracing of hadiths with lengthy words, and a person needs to review them, otherwise he will forget them.
"And the beginner student makes use of it" He makes use of it, meaning he takes it as an aid for himself, the student of knowledge who is a beginner. "And the one who has reached the end does not do without it" So people need it, whether they are beginners or those who have reached the end. As for the student who has reached the end, he makes use of it, and as for the other, he refers to it. "And I have clarified, after every hadith, who among the Imams narrated it, intending to advise the Ummah" Whenever he mentioned a hadith, he mentioned who among the Imams narrated it, meaning the Imams of hadith, such as Imam Ahmad, al-Bukhari, Muslim, and those similar to them. "Intending to advise the Ummah" This means he intended advice by that, and that is because if a person mentions a hadith and does not mention who narrated it, the listener may think that it is a valid hadith, especially if he said it by way of evidence. But if he mentions who extracted it, that is the completion of advice. However, it also needs something else, and the author followed this path, may Allah have mercy on him, which is to verify the hadith. So even if he mentions who extracted it, if the one who extracted it does not necessarily extract only valid hadiths, this is why the deficiency in the Tafsir of Ibn Jarir, may Allah have mercy on him, is that although it is considered to have covered all sayings and reports in tafsir, the flaw in it is that he does not speak about the report and its grade. Therefore, it needed extraction so that a person would know the grade of this report in the tafsir of the verse. So it is not sufficient for us to say "So-and-so narrated it" if So-and-so is one of those who did not commit to what? To extracting only valid hadiths. But the author, may Allah have mercy on him, sometimes mentions whether its chain of narration is valid, strong, or weak.
He said: "So what is meant by the seven" Meaning: If I say "extracted by the seven," "Ahmad, al-Bukhari, Muslim, Abu Dawud, al-Tirmidhi, al-Nasa'i, and Ibn Majah" This is if he says "the seven" and does not mention others. So if he says "extracted by the seven," then these are what is meant by that.
Know that a defect in extraction is for a person to mention the one of lower rank when it was narrated by one of higher rank. For example, he says "narrated by Abu Dawud" while the hadith was narrated by al-Bukhari along with Abu Dawud. This is a defect among hadith scholars, because if you neglect the stronger one, you weaken the hadith, and it becomes weak in the view of the reader or the listener. So if the hadith, for example, was narrated by al-Bukhari, Muslim, Abu Dawud, al-Tirmidhi, al-Nasa'i, and Ibn Majah, either I say "extracted by the seven" or I say "extracted by al-Bukhari, Muslim, and others among the Imams of hadith." As for saying "extracted by Abu Dawud" and stopping there, this is a defect among hadith scholars, and this is clear, because it weakens the grade of the hadith.
He says: "And by the six, those other than Ahmad" So it would be al-Bukhari, Muslim, Abu Dawud, al-Tirmidhi, al-Nasa'i, and Ibn Majah. "And by the five, those other than al-Bukhari and Muslim" So it would be Ahmad, Abu Dawud, al-Tirmidhi, al-Nasa'i, and Ibn Majah. "And I may say 'the four and Ahmad'" The author did not clarify why he used to say this? It appears that he used to say that to vary the expression, and it may be that he came to know that those who narrated it were the four, and then he came to know that Imam Ahmad also narrated it, so he added him. Yes. "And by the four, those other than the first three" And they are Ahmad, al-Bukhari, and Muslim, so these would be Abu Dawud, al-Tirmidhi, al-Nasa'i, and Ibn Majah. "And by the three, those other than them and other than the last one" Other than the last one? Ibn Majah. So if he says "extracted by the three," it is Abu Dawud, al-Tirmidhi, and al-Nasa'i. "And by 'agreed upon,' al-Bukhari and Muslim" And this is what has been agreed upon by convention as "agreed upon" is what the majority of people now mean, meaning the majority of authored books, if they say "agreed upon," the meaning is "extracted by al-Bukhari and Muslim." But al-Majd, Majd al-Din 'Abd al-Salam ibn Taymiyyah, may Allah have mercy on him, the grandfather of the Shaykh al-Islam, in "al-Muntakha", if he says "agreed upon," the meaning is the three: Ahmad, al-Bukhari, and Muslim. But this is a specific convention. "And I may not mention with them anyone else" With whom? Al-Bukhari and Muslim, anyone else. And that is because the scholars received what they narrated with acceptance. And if the scholars have received that with acceptance, adding something else is a matter of... "And what is other than that—meaning other than these seven—is clarified" And it will become clear to you, if Allah wills, in what follows. "And I named it Bulugh al-Maram min Adillat al-Ahkam" Or "Bulugh"?
The student: ...

The Shaykh : Huh?
The student: ...

The Shaykh : If we say "Bulugh al-Maram min Adillat al-Ahkam," then "Bulugh" is a report for a deleted subject, and the estimation is "This is Bulugh al-Maram," and upon this, the sentence becomes the second object of "I named it" by way of narration. And if we say "I named it Bulugh al-Maram" as you say "I named my son 'Abd Allah," then "Bulugh" becomes the second object and there is no need for estimation. "And I ask Allah that He not make what we have learned a burden upon us" "Allah" is in the accusative case because it is the object of "I ask," placed before it, and placing the object before the verb implies restriction, meaning I ask, and no one else, that He not make what we have learned a burden upon us. And that is by acting upon it, because what we have learned is either an argument for us or an argument against us, by the saying of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him and his family): So if you act upon it, it is for you, and if you do not act upon it, it is against you. And "wabal" means sin and punishment. "And that He grant us the provision of acting upon what pleases Him, (Glorified and Exalted is He)" Provision is giving. Acting upon what pleases Him means in speech, action, and belief, (Glorified and Exalted is He). This is the introduction and preface of the book. And know that the author said at the beginning: "As for what follows, this is an abridgment" So what is referred to, is it what was in his mind or what was present before him? The answer is that this is found often in authored works: "As for what follows, this is..." and its extraction is as follows: If the book was authored before the reference, it is a reference to what was present before him. And if it was not authored, which is the common case, it is a reference to what was in the author's mind. So this means what he conceived in his mind until the end of what...