or “he ordered,” “he narrated,” or “So-and-so mentioned such-and-such,” this amounts to affirming the report’s authenticity with respect to the person cited. By contrast, wording that is non-decisive—such as “it is related,” “it is mentioned,” “it is told,” “it is said,” “it was narrated,” “it was reported,” or “it was told from so-and-so that…”—does not constitute a judgment that the report is authentic ascribed to that individual. Yet it is not to be deemed weak either, since its very inclusion in the book entitled Ṣaḥīḥ precludes that. Allah knows best.

Fifth: Sound reports (ṣaḥīḥ) fall into several ranks. The highest is what both al-Bukhārī and Muslim agreed upon; then what al-Bukhārī alone related; then what Muslim alone related; then what meets the criteria of both; then what meets the criteria of al-Bukhārī; then what meets the criteria of Muslim; and finally what others have judged authentic. When the scholars say, “ṣaḥīḥ, agreed upon,” or “agreed on its authenticity,” they mean agreement between the two Shaykhs. Shaykh Taqī al-Dīn stated that whatever the two—or even one of them—have narrated is definitively authentic and imparts certain knowledge. The majority of critical scholars disagreed, maintaining that such a report provides only probable knowledge unless it reaches the level of tawātur. Allah knows best.

Sixth: In these times, should someone come across a ḥadīth with a sound chain of transmission in a book or booklet that no reliable ḥadīth master has explicitly authenticated, Shaykh Taqī al-Dīn said it is impermissible to pronounce it sound, owing to the inadequate expertise of people today. The view that seems stronger to me is that it is permissible for one whose competence is proven and whose knowledge is strong. Allah knows best. Whoever wishes to act upon a ḥadīth found in a book must obtain it from a dependable copy that he himself—or a trustworthy scholar—has collated against sound exemplars; it suffices if he has compared it with a verified, authoritative master copy. Allah knows best.