The Ḥasan Ṣaḥīḥ of Imām at-Tirmidhī

During one’s read of Jāmiʿ at-Tirmidhī (جامع الترمذي) compiled by Imām Abū ʿĪsá at-Tirmidhī رحمه الله (d. 279 AH), it is frequent nature for one to come across his use of the term “Ḥasan Ṣaḥīḥ” (حسن صحيح) during one of his gradings.1 Now, what does this grading actually mean? To fully grasp this issue, we must refer back to the basics of Muṣṭalaḥ.

Looking into basics of Muṣṭalaḥ al-Ḥadīth, both of these terms have a meaning on their own, which are:

  1. Ṣaḥīḥ (صحيح); authentic. It has met all five conditions for a Ḥadīth to reach the level of Ṣaḥīḥ, which are: a connected Isnād, devout and just Rūwāh, precision in transmission, free from Shādhdh, and free from hidden defects.
  2. Ḥasan (حسن); fair. It has met the conditions of the Ḥadīth that is Ṣaḥīḥ except it lacks in the condition of precision in transmission, meaning one of it’s narrators is less precise than the narrator(s) of the Ṣaḥīḥ.

So now having dissected these two terms, how can it then be possible for them to be joined together when one of them is slighty lower in rank than the other? This is an issue the Muḥaddithūn have differed over, but the most popular views are the following:

  1. One of the chains of the Ḥadīth is Ḥasan and another is Ṣaḥīḥ. This is mentioned by ibn aṣ-Ṣalāḥ رحمه الله (d. 643 AH) in his Muqaddimah ʿUlūm al-Ḥadīth.
  2. The Ḥadīth is either Ḥasan or Ṣaḥīḥ, as scholars would differ over what to call it. This is mentioned by al-Ḥāfiẓ ibn Ḥajar al-ʿAsqalānī رحمه الله (d. 852 AH) in his Nuzhah an-Naẓar.
  3. It is a grade above Ḥasan and below Ṣaḥīḥ. This is the view of Imām ibn Kathīr رحمه الله (d. 774 AH) in his Ikhtiṣār ʿUlūm al-Ḥadīth.
  4. The Ḥadīth is Ḥasan by itself,2 or Ṣaḥīḥ due to other narrations.3 This is mentioned by ʿAbd al-Ḥaqq ad-Dahlawī (d. 1052 AH) in his Sharḥ Mishkāt al-Maṣābīḥ.
  5. That they are two descriptions; Ḥasan describing it as good, and Ṣaḥīḥ describing it as a higher level of precision in it’s transmission due to it’s narrators. This is the view of ibn Daqīq al-ʿĪd رحمه الله (d. 702 AH) in his al-Iqtirāḥ and Imām adh-Dhahabī رحمه الله (d. 748 AH) in his Muqaddimah al-Mawqiẓah. al-Ḥāfiẓ ibn Ḥajar al-ʿAsqalānī رحمه الله stated in his Nukat ʿalá Kitāb ibn aṣ-Ṣalāḥ that this is the strongest view. Similiarly, al-Ḥāfiẓ ibn Rajab al-Ḥanbalī رحمه الله (d. 795 AH) in his explanation of al-ʿIlal by Imām at-Tirmidhī رحمه الله said: “A Ḥadīth will only be Ḥasan Ṣaḥīḥ when it’s chain is connected, uninterrupted, narrated by trustworthy and just narrators, not Shādhdh, and similar is reported from other routes. As for Ṣaḥīḥ by itself,4 then it is not a condition that a similar narration is related from other routes, but it also must not be Shādhdh; so in this case, al-Ḥasan aṣ-Ṣaḥīḥ is stronger than what is only Ṣaḥīḥ.”
  6. It is Ḥasan in rank and it’s chain is Ṣaḥīḥ. This is mentioned by Shaykh Muḥammad ibn ʿAbd ar-Raḥmān al-Mubārakfūrī رحمه الله (d. 1353 AH) in his Tuḥfah al-Aḥwadhī.

And there are many other views similar to these in relation to this matter.

And Allāh knows best.

All praise is due to Allāh, may His peace & blessings be upon our final Prophet Muḥammad, his family, his companions, & all those who follow him in guidance.

Ṣafīullāh Labīb ibn Salīm ʿAbd al-Malik
29th of Rajab 1444

  1. It is also worthy to note that Imām at-Tirmidhī is not the only scholar to use this term, as he quotes Imām al-Bukhārī saying the same under Jāmiʿ at-Tirmidhī #1742. ↩︎
  2. Ḥasan Lidhātihi (حسن لذاته); A Ḥadīth that is Ḥasan on it’s own. ↩︎
  3. Ṣaḥīḥ Lighayrihi (صحيح لغيره); A Ḥadīth that is originally Ḥasan on it’s own but is raised to Ṣaḥīḥ when it’s other chains are combined. ↩︎
  4. Ṣaḥīḥ Lidhātihi (صحيح لذاته); A Ḥadīth that is Ṣaḥīḥ on it’s own. ↩︎