include in their compilation any ḥadith except one that is free of hidden defects, or whose defect, in their judgment, does not affect authenticity. Therefore, if the critic’s remarks are granted any weight, they simply stand in opposition to the two imams’ verdict of soundness—and theirs unquestionably carries more authority than anyone else’s. Hence, the objection collapses in general terms.
As for the particulars, the ḥadiths that have been criticised in the two Ṣaḥīḥs fall into six categories:
- Reports in which the transmitters differ by adding to, or omitting from, the chain of transmission.
- Reports in which the transmitters differ by substituting certain narrators in the chain.
- Reports where a single narrator mentions an addition that those who are more numerous or more reliable do not mention.
- Reports uniquely transmitted by someone whose reliability has been questioned.
- Reports in which one of the narrators is thought to have made an error.
- Reports over which there is disagreement concerning particular words of the matn (the text itself).
While outlining these categories, Ibn Ḥajar offered a collective reply, singled out a number of the contested reports, and then discussed them in detail to clarify the summary answer. He went on to say: “These are the overall categories of what the imams have criticised in the Ṣaḥīḥ. I have gathered, verified, classified, and elaborated upon them, and—praise be to Allah—nothing emerges from them that would impair the basic subject-matter of the book, save in the rarest of cases.”
At the end of the section he adds: “This is everything that the critical ḥuffāẓ—those skilled in detecting the subtle defects of isnāds (chains of transmission) and acquainted with the hidden pathways of narration—have taken issue with.” He then concludes: “When the fair-minded reader reflects on what I have set down here, the stature of the author will loom large before him, the greatness of his compilation will stand out, and he will readily understand why the leading scholars received it with acceptance and submission, preferring it above every other ḥadith collection, ancient or modern.”