Al-hakim Al-mustadrak Vol. 4 - P. 398 Better

Unveiling a Landmark Reference: A Deep Dive into Al-Hakim al-Mustadrak Vol. 4 P. 398

In the vast ocean of Islamic Hadith literature, few works command as much respect, scrutiny, and scholarly debate as Al-Mustadrak ‘ala al-Sahihayn by Imam al-Hakim al-Nishapuri (d. 405 AH/1014 CE). For the serious student of Islamic sciences, a citation such as "al-hakim al-mustadrak vol. 4 p. 398" is not merely a page number—it is a gateway to understanding the intricate methodologies of early Hadith criticism, the hierarchy of authenticity, and the preservation of Prophetic traditions.

This article explores the significance of this specific reference, the content typically found on that page across published editions, its standing among Sunni scholars, and why it remains a critical footnote in Islamic scholarship.

How to Cite This Reference Properly

If you are a student, researcher, or writer, correctly citing Al-Hakim al-Mustadrak vol. 4, p. 398 requires precision. Follow this template:

Al-Hakim al-Nishapuri, Al-Mustadrak ‘ala al-Sahihayn, ed. Mustafa ‘Abd al-Qadir ‘Ata (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyyah, 1990), vol. 4, p. 398, hadith no. [X]. al-hakim al-mustadrak vol. 4 p. 398

Note: Different editions may have slight pagination shifts. The classic Beirut edition (4 volumes) most commonly uses this page number. The newer Dar al-Minhaj edition (5 volumes) sometimes shifts it to vol. 4, p. 474 or vol. 5, p. 128. Therefore, always mention the hadith number in addition to the page.

In the standard Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyyah edition, page 398 corresponds to Hadith number 4720 (or 4721-4723). Verify against your copy.

The Weight of a Single Page: Textual Criticism and Spiritual Legacy in Al-Hakim’s Mustadrak (Vol. 4, p. 398)

In the vast ocean of Hadith literature, few works occupy as unique a position as Al-Mustadrak ‘ala al-Sahihayn by Imam al-Hakim al-Naysaburi (d. 405 AH/1014 CE). Conceived as a supplement to the two most authoritative canonical collections—those of al-Bukhari and Muslim—al-Hakim’s work promised to gather authentic narrations they had omitted. Yet, turning to a specific page, such as volume 4, page 398 of a standard edition, is not merely an exercise in locating a tradition; it is an act of witnessing the intense scholarly debate over the very definition of authenticity. This page, depending on the print and the hadith it contains, serves as a microcosm of the tensions between stringent methodology, spiritual need, and the enduring legacy of Islamic orthodoxy. Unveiling a Landmark Reference: A Deep Dive into

Volume 4 of the Mustadrak typically focuses on the Manaqib (Virtues) of the Companions, later figures, and various ethical and eschatological themes. Page 398, in many editions, falls within a section discussing the virtues of specific actions or the station of certain individuals before God. The content of a hadith found here—perhaps narrating a moment of profound divine mercy, a unique characteristic of a Companion, or a warning about the Last Days—would reflect al-Hakim’s inclusive approach. Unlike al-Bukhari, who often required direct audition between contemporaries, al-Hakim was more lenient regarding ‘an‘anah (narrative linkage using "on the authority of"), provided the transmitters were trustworthy. Thus, the narrations on this page exemplify his principle: a hadith could be sahih (sound) according to the standards of the two Shaykhs (al-Bukhari and Muslim) even if they themselves did not include it.

However, the true significance of page 398 lies not in the hadith text alone, but in the thunderous marginal notes that often accompany it—the critiques of Imam al-Dhahabi (d. 748 AH/1348 CE), al-Hakim’s own student. In his abridgement and critique, Talkhis al-Mustadrak, al-Dhahabi frequently follows al-Hakim’s judgment with the devastating phrase: “Bal munkar” (Rather, it is rejected) or “La asla lahu” (It has no basis). If one were to look at a hadith on page 398 that al-Hakim declared sahih, one would likely find al-Dhahabi arguing that a particular transmitter is weak, unknown (majhul), or even accused of lying. This dialectic transforms the page from a simple collection into a courtroom drama. For the student of hadith, this page is a live demonstration of how Islamic scholarship is not a monolithic acceptance of texts but a continuous, critical dialogue across centuries.

Furthermore, the presence of certain narrations on page 398 reveals the popular religious concerns of al-Hakim’s era (4th-5th century AH). This was a time when Shi’i Fatimid propaganda was rising, and various theological sects—Mu’tazila, Ash’arites, and traditionalist Hanbalis—were fiercely debating the nature of God and the status of the Companions. By including traditions about the virtues of Abu Bakr, Umar, and Uthman on pages like 398, al-Hakim was making a deliberate theological statement reinforcing Sunni orthodoxy against Shi’i critiques. Similarly, a hadith about intercession (shafa’ah) or seeing God in the Hereafter (ru’yah) would directly counter Mu’tazili denials. Thus, the page is not neutral; it is a battlefield where creedal lines are drawn through chains of transmission. Al-Hakim al-Nishapuri, Al-Mustadrak ‘ala al-Sahihayn , ed

In conclusion, a single page—volume 4, page 398 of Al-Mustadrak—is far more than a collection of prophetic sayings. It is a layered document of Islamic intellectual history. It contains al-Hakim’s ambitious attempt to complete the work of his predecessors, al-Dhahabi’s ruthless but necessary corrective, and the underlying theological anxieties of a medieval Muslim society. To read this page authentically is to listen to a polyphony of voices: the Prophet’s (peace be upon him) reported words, the jurist’s desire for legal proofs, the historian’s caution, and the believer’s yearning for assurance. It reminds us that in the Islamic tradition, authenticity is not a simple binary of true or false; it is a negotiated verdict, hammered out one narrator, one link, and one page at a time.

3. Shi’i-Sunni Polemics

For Twelver Shi’i scholars, Al-Mustadrak vol. 4, p. 398 is a prized citation. They argue:

• Al-Hakim was a towering Sunni authority.
• He explicitly said the hadiths here are Sahih according to Bukhari/Muslim's standards.
• Therefore, these narrations prove the superiority of ‘Ali and his exclusive status as the "gate to the city of knowledge."

Sunni response: Even if al-Hakim authenticated them, greater critics (Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani, al-Dhahabi) weakened them due to a weak narrator (e.g., Ja‘far ibn Sulayman, or Maysarah ibn ‘Abd Rabbih, depending on the edition). Therefore, the page is not definitive proof.

The Author: Imam al-Hakim al-Nishapuri (321–405 AH)

Before examining the page, we must understand the author. Imam al-Hakim was a prodigy from Nishapur, a center of Islamic learning in present-day Iran. His full name was Muhammad ibn ‘Abd Allah ibn Muhammad ibn Hamdawayh. He memorized the Qur’an at an early age and traveled extensively to Baghdad, Basra, Ray, and Transoxiana to collect hadith.

His magnum opus, Al-Mustadrak ‘ala al-Sahihayn, was a daring project. Imam al-Hakim aimed to compile hadiths that met the rigorous authenticity criteria of Imams al-Bukhari and Muslim—the two most authoritative hadith collectors—but which had not been included in their compilations, Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim. In other words, he sought to complete the "missing" authentic hadiths.