If the mursal (disconnected) narration of a hadith is preferred over the connected chain, is it considered a defect that invalidates it, or is it considered a case of an acceptable addition by a trustworthy narrator?

The questioner : If the path of *irsal* (omitting the Companion) in a hadith is stronger than the connected path.

The Shaykh : How?

The questioner : If *irsal* (omitting the Companion) is stronger.

The Shaykh : I did not understand.
Al-Halabi : It is preferred.

The questioner : If *irsal* (omitting the Companion) is stronger.

The Shaykh : *Irsal* (omitting the Companion) is stronger.

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh: All right.

The questioner : In the hadith, over the connected chain, is it considered a defect that invalidates it, or is it considered a case of an acceptable addition by a trustworthy narrator?

The Shaykh : Is it considered what?

The questioner : It is a defect that invalidates it.

The Shaykh : Or.

The questioner : Or is it considered a case of an addition by a trustworthy narrator?

The Shaykh : How does this question coexist with the premise? Because this question asks whether it is considered a defect that invalidates it. If it is considered a defect that invalidates it, it is not considered an addition by a trustworthy narrator.

The questioner : ... withdrawing from what ... because the question was written to me and it requires reflection.

The Shaykh : I mean, you are not reciting it; in our Levantine dialect, we would call you a storyteller. In any case, the intent is clear. This mursal (disconnected) narration, or this hadith narrated in two forms, mursal and musnad (connected), either the mursal is the preferred one, in which case the musnad is dropped and it becomes defective, and at that point the question of whether it is a case of an addition by a trustworthy narrator does not arise, because this is a weaker addition and the mursal is the stronger one. Or, if we reverse it and say no, this is a case of an addition by a trustworthy narrator, and the addition by a trustworthy narrator is accepted, then at that point it is not correct to say that the mursal is the stronger one. It is necessary to distinguish between the two matters completely. If one is established, the other is lifted; if the other is established, the first is lifted, and so on.

The questioner : His intent is that if the mursal is more authentic and the connected one is sound, the mursal is more authentic and the connected one is sound.

The Shaykh: All right.

The questioner : So, is the connected one an addition by a trustworthy narrator or not?

The Shaykh : No.

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : Stay in your place, stay in your place, stay in your place. What does your speech lead to? I mean, the man.
Al-'Abaylan: With a difference in the source, meaning.

The Shaykh : With a difference.
Al-'Abaylan: With a difference in the source and without the unity of the path, meaning the mursal is not the connected one in the same path.

The Shaykh : No, it may be, it may be. May Allah bless you.
Al-'Abaylan: This is a stronger defect to weaken one of them, either the mursal or the connected one.

The Shaykh : May Allah bless you. I say that the mursal and the musnad both revolve around one single person.
Al-'Abaylan: Yes.

The Shaykh : Therefore, it is not necessary for the path to be different, the path being different without the mursal or without the musnad. For example, Sa'id ibn al-Musayyib, the hadith came from him, he said: Abu Hurayrah said: The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said. It came from another person, not the first one, from Sa'id, he said: The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said. The path is two paths to one person. It may come mursal from this angle; this is a matter that takes another form. The text of the same hadith may come from two different paths, completely, one mursal with no contradicting mursal, and the other musnad. The question does not arise in such a case at all. On the contrary, the mursal becomes strong by the musnad, even if it was weak, provided that it is not very weak.

The questioner : The second picture.

The Shaykh : The first case is where the mursal and the musnad are one, but they came from two paths, and we assume them to be sound. One says: from the mursal, the Messenger of Allah said. The other says: from this mursal, Abu Hurayrah said: The Messenger of Allah said. Here, one looks at the chain of narration to this narrator; which one is more trustworthy, which one is more sound, that one is the preferred one. Therefore, whether the research is as we understood earlier, or as the doctor intended to illustrate earlier, the answer is clear. That if the same hadith comes from a trustworthy man and the two narrators differ from him by its disconnection and connection, the ruling is for the one who is more trustworthy and more memorizing, or if they are equal, the ruling is for the one with more. As for the other case, this is another matter.

The questioner : One of them, the other.

The Shaykh : The other case.

The questioner : The second one.

The Shaykh : Yes.