or because the secondary chain contains an additional wording that draws attention to some benefit not found in the first version.”

2- The weakness attributed to the narrator on whom the Ṣaḥīḥ relies may have arisen only after the compiler had already taken ḥadīths from him—such as the onset of confusion (ikhtilāṭ). Therefore, whatever the author transmitted from him while he was still reliable is unaffected by the confusion that befell him later.

3- The compiler of the Ṣaḥīḥ may have deliberately avoided the very material for which the disputed narrator was criticized. Al-Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar, in Fatḥ al-Bārī while commenting on the ḥadīth in which the Prophet ﷺ repeated a statement three times so that it would be understood, says: “It has been established that whenever al-Bukhārī narrates from someone against whom there is comment, he does not include anything for which that narrator has been faulted.” End quote. Muslim follows the same method. Al-Nawawī, in the introduction to his commentary on Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim, states: “Know that any narration in the two Ṣaḥīḥs coming from those who practiced tadlīs and introduced by ʿan or similar terms is to be understood in light of separate proof of direct hearing; indeed, many such reports are found in the Ṣaḥīḥ through both kinds of chains together.”