Next comes divergence (mukhālafah): if it (1) arises through altering (2) the flow of the chain, the report is classed as mudraj al-isnād (3) — an interpolation in the chain of transmission. Or, if it involves merging (4) a mawqūf (5) narration with a marfūʿ one, the result is mudraj al-matn, an interpolation within the wording. Or, if portions are transposed — brought forward or put back (6) — the ḥadith is maqlūb (reversed). Or, if an extra transmitter is inserted, it falls under al-mazīd fī muttaṣil al-asānīd (7), the category of “additional link within a continuous chain.” Or, if a transmitter is replaced with another without any grounds for preference, the report becomes muḍṭarib; such substitution may (8) even be carried out deliberately as a test. Or, if (9) individual letters are altered while the overall context remains, the error is muṣaḥḥaf or muḥarraf (10).
It is impermissible to willfully alter (11) the text of a ḥadith by omission or by substituting synonyms, except for a scholar (12) who understands what changes (13) would distort the meanings. When the meaning is still obscure, one must explain the gharīb (unfamiliar terms) and resolve the mushkil (problematic passages) (14).
(1) The words “in kanat” (if it was) are missing from MS W.
(2) MS Z reads “bi-taghyir” (with alteration). The author notes in Nuzhat al-Nazar: “A chain in which such an alteration occurs is called mudraj al-isnad (interpolated isnad).”
(3) MS Z also has “wa-mudraj” (and interpolated).
(4) MS H records “bi-damjin” (with merging) in the genitive with tanwin; this is erroneous.
(5) MS Ha reads “mawqufan” (as a halted report); this is a mistaken reading.
(6) MSS W and D have “aw taʾkhir” (or postponement).
(7) MS Ha offers “al-masanid” (the musnads), whereas MS Z reads “al-isnad” (the isnad).
(8) The particle “wa-qad” (and indeed) is absent from MS Z.
(9) MS W has “taghyiru” without a preposition, while MS Z reads “bi-taghyir” (with alteration). The author writes in Nuzhat al-Nazar: “Or if the discrepancy arises from changing a letter or letters.”
(10) MS Z reads “fa-l-muharraf” (then it is classified as muharraf).
(11) MS Z has “al-taghyir bi-l-naqs” (alteration by omission) instead of “taghyir al-matn bi-l-naqs” (altering the text by omission). In MS W the word “taghyir” is missing; a marginal note there suggests: “perhaps it should read: taʿammud taghyir” (deliberate alteration).
(12) MS W reads “li-l-ʿalim” (for the scholar).
(13) MS H reads “yahilu” with an initial fatḥa; this is incorrect.
(14) MS Z adds the word “minha” (from it), whereas MS Ha leaves a blank at this point; the phrase belongs to Nuzhat al-Nazar.