Recognising Hasan (Good) Hadith
It is narrated from Abu Sulayman al-Khattabi that he said, after mentioning that hadith is divided into three categories (sahih, hasan, and da‘if): “Hasan hadith is that whose origin is known, and whose narrators are recognised. Most hadith fall under this category, and it is accepted by most scholars and used by the majority of jurists.”
(Reference: In his book Ma‘alim al-Sunan, the commentary on Mukhtasar Sunan Abi Dawud, vol. 1, p. 11.)
It is also narrated from Abu ‘Isa al-Tirmidhi that he defined hasan as: “A hadith whose chain does not contain anyone accused of lying, is not anomalous (shadh), and is narrated through more than one route or similar means.”
Some later scholars defined hasan as: “A hadith with a slight weakness that is tolerable and can be acted upon.” (Reference: This is the definition given by Ibn al-Jawzi in al-Mawdu‘at.)
These definitions are somewhat vague and do not fully distinguish hasan from sahih. Tirmidhi’s definition, for instance, could also apply to sahih, and he sometimes describes hadith as hasan gharib (good but singular), meaning it has only one known route.
Classification of Hasan Hadith
After examining the various definitions and their applications, it becomes clear that hasan hadith falls into two categories:
A hadith whose narrators include someone whose reliability is not fully established but who is not known for excessive mistakes or dishonesty.
- This type is strengthened when it has supporting narrations (mutaba‘at) or a corroborating hadith (shahid), meaning another narration that conveys a similar meaning.
- Tirmidhi’s definition applies to this category.
A hadith whose narrators are known for honesty but are not at the highest level of precision and accuracy.
- This category includes narrators who are reliable but have some deficiency in their memory.
- This type is stronger than the first category, as its narrators are known for integrity.
- Al-Khattabi’s definition applies to this category.
Both categories require that the hadith is not shadh (anomalous) and has more than one route of transmission.
Key Differences Between Sahih and Hasan Hadith
A sahih hadith requires that all its narrators have established trustworthiness and precision, either explicitly stated or widely known through their reputation. In contrast, a hasan hadith does not require this level of confirmation.
This is similar to Imam al-Shafi‘i’s view on mursal hadith. He stated that if a mursal hadith is supported by a connected narration or another mursal from a different route, it is acceptable.
(Reference: al-Risalah, pp. 461-467. Further discussion on al-Shafi‘i’s stance on mursal hadith can be found in upcoming sections.)
Can Weak Hadith Become Hasan by Multiple Chains?
Some may ask why certain hadiths remain weak despite having multiple chains, such as the hadith “The ears are part of the head.”
(Reported by Ahmad in al-Musnad, vol. 2, p. 258, from Abu Umamah, also by Abu Dawud in Bab Sifat Wudu’ al-Nabi, vol. 1, p. 27, al-Tirmidhi in Bab al-Adhan min al-Ra’s, vol. 1, p. 53, and Ibn Majah in Bab al-Adhan min al-Ra’s, vol. 1, p. 152. Ibn Majah also narrated it from Abu Hurayrah, ‘Abdullah ibn Zayd, and others. Al-Daraqutni included it in vol. 1, pp. 17-105, from Anas, Abu Musa, Ibn ‘Abbas, Ibn ‘Umar, and ‘A’ishah. None of its chains are free from criticism, leading al-Daraqutni, ‘Abd al-Haqq, and others to criticise it. However, Ibn al-Qattan classified it as hasan or sahih based on its multiple routes. See Nasb al-Rayah, vol. 1, pp. 18-20, Fayd al-Qadir by al-Munawi, vol. 3, p. 173, and Sharh al-‘Azizi, vol. 2, p. 128.)
The answer is that not every weakness is removed by multiple chains. Some weaknesses are minor, such as a narrator’s slight weakness in memory, which can be strengthened by corroboration.
However, if the weakness is severe—such as a narrator being accused of lying or a hadith contradicting stronger reports—then multiple chains do not strengthen it.
When Hasan Hadith Becomes Sahih
If a hasan hadith has a narrator who is not at the highest level of precision but is widely known for honesty and is further supported by other routes, it can be elevated to sahih.
Example
The hadith of Muhammad ibn ‘Amr, from Abu Salamah, from Abu Hurayrah: “If it were not for the hardship upon my ummah, I would have commanded them to use the siwak at every prayer.”
Muhammad ibn ‘Amr ibn ‘Alqamah is known for honesty and reliability, but he was not at the highest level of precision, leading some scholars to criticise his memory while others considered him trustworthy. His hadith, therefore, is classified as hasan.
However, when the same hadith is narrated through multiple routes, it strengthens his narration, removing concerns about his memory, and thus the hadith reaches the level of sahih.
May Allah grant us beneficial knowledge.
Ulum al-Hadith (Muqaddimah Ibn Salah) Pg 29-35
Tirmidhi’s Contribution to Identifying Hasan Hadith
One of the foundational sources for understanding hasan hadith is the work of Abu ‘Isa al-Tirmidhi. He frequently classified hadith as hasan in his Jami‘ and provided extensive discussion on the topic. Mentions of hasan hadith can also be found in the statements of his teachers and predecessors, such as Ahmad ibn Hanbal, al-Bukhari, and others.
Different manuscript copies of Jami‘ al-Tirmidhi sometimes vary in the wording of classifications, such as “This is a hasan hadith” or “This is a hasan sahih hadith.” Scholars should verify their sources by comparing multiple manuscripts and relying on the most consistent ones. Al-Daraqutni also commented on many of these classifications in his Sunan.
Another major source for hasan hadith is Sunan Abi Dawud. Abu Dawud stated:
“I have included in my book what is sahih and what closely resembles it.”
He also mentioned that in each chapter, he selected the most authentic hadith available and that if a hadith had a significant flaw, he explicitly pointed it out. However, if he did not indicate any weakness, it should be considered acceptable, though some hadith in his collection are stronger than others. (Reference: Abu Dawud’s letter to the people of Makkah, p. 30. Some scholars have debated whether sahih can be assumed for every hadith that Abu Dawud did not explicitly criticise. Al-‘Iraqi discusses this extensively in his notes on Ibn al-Salah, concluding that it is safer to refer to such hadith as salih (acceptable) rather than hasan.)
Thus, if a hadith in Sunan Abi Dawud is neither in Sahih al-Bukhari nor Sahih Muslim and has not been explicitly classified as sahih by hadith scholars, it is reasonable to assume that Abu Dawud considered it hasan. However, this does not mean it is necessarily hasan according to other scholars.
Differentiating Between Hasan and Sahih Hadith
The classification of hadith as hasan differs from sahih in that the narrators of a hasan hadith do not need to have a confirmed high level of precision (dhabt). Instead, hasan narrators are generally reliable but may have a lesser degree of accuracy compared to the narrators of sahih hadith.
This distinction has led some scholars, such as al-Hakim, to treat hasan hadith as a subset of sahih, since both are acceptable for deriving rulings. Al-Khattabi and other scholars also noted that jurists sometimes accept hasan hadith even when it does not meet the strictest standards of sahih.
The Status of Hasan Hadith in Different Collections
- The classification system used by al-Baghawi in al-Masabih divides hadith into two categories:
- Sahih: Hadith found in Sahih al-Bukhari or Sahih Muslim.
- Hasan: Hadith found in Sunan Abi Dawud, Jami‘ al-Tirmidhi, and similar collections.
This classification is not based on the technical definitions of sahih and hasan but rather on the sources where the hadith appear. In reality, the books of Abu Dawud and al-Tirmidhi contain both hasan and weak hadith.
The musnad collections, such as those by Abu Dawud al-Tayalisi, Ahmad ibn Hanbal, and others, are not treated in the same way as the five primary hadith books (Sahih al-Bukhari, Sahih Muslim, Sunan Abi Dawud, Jami‘ al-Tirmidhi, and Sunan al-Nasa’i). The musnad books typically include all hadith attributed to a given Companion, without restricting themselves to sahih reports.
Because of this, hadith from musnad collections require additional scrutiny before being classified as hasan or sahih.
“Sahih Isnad” vs. “Sahih Hadith”
Scholars differentiate between:
- “This hadith has a sahih isnad”: Meaning the chain appears authentic, but the hadith may still have defects such as being shadh (anomalous) or containing a hidden flaw (‘illah).
- “This hadith is sahih”: Meaning both the chain and content meet the criteria of authenticity.
A scholar who says “sahih isnad” but does not indicate any defects is likely implying the hadith itself is authentic. (Reference: Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah pointed out that if a hadith scholar avoids saying “sahih” and instead says “sahih isnad”, it may indicate some hesitation. Tadrib al-Rawi, p. 92.)
The Phrase “Hasan Sahih” in Tirmidhi’s Work
A well-known issue is Tirmidhi’s use of the phrase “hasan sahih” to describe some hadith. This seems contradictory since hasan implies the hadith falls short of sahih.
The best explanation is that “hasan sahih” refers to a hadith reported through multiple chains:
- One chain is hasan due to a slightly weaker narrator.
- Another chain is sahih, meeting all conditions of authenticity.
Thus, the hadith is hasan in one route and sahih in another.
Another possibility is that Tirmidhi sometimes used hasan in its linguistic sense, meaning “acceptable” or “pleasing,” rather than its technical meaning.
(Reference: Tirmidhi frequently uses four phrases: “sahih gharib,” “hasan gharib,” “hasan sahih,” and “hasan sahih gharib.” Scholars have debated the meaning of these phrases, particularly “hasan sahih.” A thorough discussion can be found in Imam al-Tirmidhi wa al-Muwazanah bayna Jam‘ihi wa Bayna al-Sahihayn, pp. 185-199, and in Ibn Rajab’s Sharh ‘Ilal al-Tirmidhi, pp. 293-361.)
Does Hasan Hadith Fall Under Sahih?
Some hadith scholars do not treat hasan as a separate category but consider it a lower level of sahih. This view is found in the writings of al-Hakim, and some scholars referred to Jami‘ al-Tirmidhi as al-Jami‘ al-Sahih, though this is an overly broad usage.
Other scholars, such as al-Khatib al-Baghdadi, also sometimes called Sunan al-Nasa’i and Jami‘ al-Tirmidhi “sahih collections,” but this does not mean every hadith within them is sahih. Some hadith within these books are explicitly classified as weak.
Abu Dawud himself stated that his Sunan contains sahih and other types of hadith, while Tirmidhi frequently distinguished between sahih and hasan. Thus, calling hasan hadith sahih in a broad sense does not change the fact that it is technically inferior to sahih hadith.
Conclusion
- Tirmidhi’s Jami‘ and Abu Dawud’s Sunan are among the best sources for identifying hasan hadith.
- Not every hasan hadith in these books is universally accepted as hasan by all scholars.
- Some hadith scholars treated hasan hadith as a lower level of sahih, while others viewed it as a distinct category.
- The phrase “hasan sahih” likely refers to hadith with multiple chains, where one is hasan and another is sahih.
- Musnad collections require additional scrutiny before determining the authenticity of their hadith.
Ulum al-Hadith (Muqaddimah Ibn Salah) Pg 36-40
