a fabricated collection whose very mention in the books is impermissible, and from which one may narrate only in astonishment.”

He likewise declares sound the ḥadīth of Muḥammad ibn Isḥāq (1)—a verdict more excusable than his authentication of that report from Kathīr (2). He goes on to deem sound the reports of al-Ḥajjāj ibn Arṭāt despite the notoriety of his weakness (3). He also authenticates the ḥadīth of ʿAmr ibn Shuʿayb (4), and in that he showed excellent judgment.

The upshot is that he pronounces authentic what others do not, and on which they differ with him.

They say: As for al-Ḥākim’s grading, it is just as the poet said (5):
By morning I found myself with Laylā like one who grasps
At water—only for it to slip through the gaps of his fingers.

The hadith masters—the physicians who diagnose hidden defects (6)—pay no heed whatsoever to al-Ḥākim’s declarations of authenticity.