What is the meaning of al-Hakim's statement: "According to the conditions of al-Bukhari and Muslim"?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : What is the meaning of al-Hakim's statement: "According to the conditions of al-Bukhari and Muslim"?
The Shaykh : His intention is strange and unusual. It is clear that he means there are many hadiths that the two Shaykhs did not include in their Sahihs, outside of the two Sahihs, which meet the conditions of the two Shaykhs. It is known that the conditions of the two Shaykhs differ, or some of their conditions differ. However, al-Hakim was lenient in applying the conditions of the two Shaykhs. For example, he would authenticate a hadith from Muhammad ibn Ishaq, or Muhammad ibn 'Ajlan, or their like, from those whose hadiths are not authenticated but only graded as good if one of them narrates it alone, and authenticated if it is supported by another narration. We find al-Hakim saying in a hadith he narrates with a valid chain, hypothetically, from Muhammad ibn 'Ajlan from Suhayl ibn Abi Salih from his father from Abu Hurayrah, "This is a valid chain according to the condition of Muslim." It is not according to the condition of Muslim regarding Muhammad ibn Ishaq, Muhammad ibn 'Ajlan, and others like them, for example, that he is supported; he did not mention a supporting narration for them. Therefore, he is lenient when he uses the aforementioned phrase "according to the condition of Muslim." Many examples can be cited from this.
But the wonder is that it would have been valid for him if he had adhered strictly to the conditions of the two Shaykhs, if he had been of the same generation as the two Shaykhs, meaning he narrated directly from the Shaykhs of the two Shaykhs. But the reality is that he is later than them by a generation or more. He narrates a hadith in his Mustadrak with a chain to a Shaykh of one of the two Shaykhs, and there are two or more intermediaries between him and this Shaykh. It is self-evident that these two or these intermediaries are not according to the condition of either of the two Shaykhs. So how did he rule that the hadith is according to the condition of the two Shaykhs? We say, for example, regarding what Imam Ahmad narrates in his Musnad, that it is according to the condition of al-Bukhari, or according to the condition of Muslim, or according to the condition of both. That is because Ahmad is among the Shaykhs of the two Shaykhs, so he is of the generation of the Shaykhs. As for al-Hakim, there are two intermediaries between him and a Shaykh of al-Bukhari or Muslim. This is a specific convention of his. But this knowledge obligates us, when we want to follow al-Hakim in authenticating a hadith according to the condition of al-Bukhari or Muslim, or the condition of both, to be cautious in two ways. The first is to remember this observation regarding "according to the condition of both" in relation to his convention, meaning regardless of the two intermediaries between him and a Shaykh of one of the two Shaykhs.
As for the other observation, which is much more important, it is that sometimes his chain is not valid up to the Shaykh of the two Shaykhs, or one of them. So it is not valid to say that that hadith is good, and of course we say "according to the condition of Muslim," because the chain to Muslim's Shaykh is not valid, as it contains weakness, and perhaps more than that. This is something we have touched with our hands in no few hadiths of the Mustadrak. This is also the answer to what you asked.
The Shaykh : His intention is strange and unusual. It is clear that he means there are many hadiths that the two Shaykhs did not include in their Sahihs, outside of the two Sahihs, which meet the conditions of the two Shaykhs. It is known that the conditions of the two Shaykhs differ, or some of their conditions differ. However, al-Hakim was lenient in applying the conditions of the two Shaykhs. For example, he would authenticate a hadith from Muhammad ibn Ishaq, or Muhammad ibn 'Ajlan, or their like, from those whose hadiths are not authenticated but only graded as good if one of them narrates it alone, and authenticated if it is supported by another narration. We find al-Hakim saying in a hadith he narrates with a valid chain, hypothetically, from Muhammad ibn 'Ajlan from Suhayl ibn Abi Salih from his father from Abu Hurayrah, "This is a valid chain according to the condition of Muslim." It is not according to the condition of Muslim regarding Muhammad ibn Ishaq, Muhammad ibn 'Ajlan, and others like them, for example, that he is supported; he did not mention a supporting narration for them. Therefore, he is lenient when he uses the aforementioned phrase "according to the condition of Muslim." Many examples can be cited from this.
But the wonder is that it would have been valid for him if he had adhered strictly to the conditions of the two Shaykhs, if he had been of the same generation as the two Shaykhs, meaning he narrated directly from the Shaykhs of the two Shaykhs. But the reality is that he is later than them by a generation or more. He narrates a hadith in his Mustadrak with a chain to a Shaykh of one of the two Shaykhs, and there are two or more intermediaries between him and this Shaykh. It is self-evident that these two or these intermediaries are not according to the condition of either of the two Shaykhs. So how did he rule that the hadith is according to the condition of the two Shaykhs? We say, for example, regarding what Imam Ahmad narrates in his Musnad, that it is according to the condition of al-Bukhari, or according to the condition of Muslim, or according to the condition of both. That is because Ahmad is among the Shaykhs of the two Shaykhs, so he is of the generation of the Shaykhs. As for al-Hakim, there are two intermediaries between him and a Shaykh of al-Bukhari or Muslim. This is a specific convention of his. But this knowledge obligates us, when we want to follow al-Hakim in authenticating a hadith according to the condition of al-Bukhari or Muslim, or the condition of both, to be cautious in two ways. The first is to remember this observation regarding "according to the condition of both" in relation to his convention, meaning regardless of the two intermediaries between him and a Shaykh of one of the two Shaykhs.
As for the other observation, which is much more important, it is that sometimes his chain is not valid up to the Shaykh of the two Shaykhs, or one of them. So it is not valid to say that that hadith is good, and of course we say "according to the condition of Muslim," because the chain to Muslim's Shaykh is not valid, as it contains weakness, and perhaps more than that. This is something we have touched with our hands in no few hadiths of the Mustadrak. This is also the answer to what you asked.