be authentic and singular, such as the hadith, “Actions are judged only by intentions”; the hadith, “He forbade selling or giving away the right of patronage”; and the hadith, “He entered Mecca wearing a helmet.” These are authentic reports that have been accepted. The first is not authentically established from anyone other than ‘Umar; the second is not known from anyone other than his son ‘Abd Allāh; and the third is known only through al-Zuhrī’s narration from Anas. However, those who criticized al-Tirmidhī did not understand what he meant by much of what he said.

Hadith scholars may say, “This hadith is singular,” meaning through this particular route. They sometimes state this explicitly, saying, “Singular through this route.” Thus, a hadith may be authentic and well known to them through one route, but when transmitted through another route, it is singular through that route, even though its text is authentic and well known. Accordingly, when al-Tirmidhī says, “Good and singular,” he may mean that it is singular through that particular route, while its text has corroborating reports that bring it into the category of good hadiths.

Other scholars dispute some of al-Tirmidhī’s assessments of authenticity, just as they may dispute some of his assessments of reports as weak or good. He may judge a hadith weak while al-Bukhārī judges it authentic. One example is the report of Ibn Mas‘ūd: when the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, said to him, “Find me stones with which to cleanse myself,” he said, “I brought him two stones and a piece of dung.” He said, “He took the two stones, left the dung, and said, ‘It is impure.’” This report was transmitted in differing versions from Abū Ishāq al-Sabī‘ī, and al-Tirmidhī regarded this variation