Yes, Salafi sources, when it comes to Hadith, are generally stricter than the Sunni ones (but not always).
You mentioned that one Ghazwa e Hind Hadith has been graded 'Sahih' by a twentieth-century Muhaddith, Naseeruddin al-Albani (d. 1999). Well, al-Albani, although considered reliable by 'some', has been criticized and questioned by several other contemporary scholars for his applied methodology as it resulted in authentication of many Ahadith previously considered unauthentic by Classic scholars (and vice versa) and several books have been published by well-known scholars to refute the lies, falsehoods, fabrications, and innovations of Albani. (in their own words)... But without going into those details, let's discuss this specific Hadith, its chain of narrators, and al-Albani's comments on it. Posted it in the other thread (that got deleted), posting it here again.
"God shall save two groups of people from amongst my followers from hellfire. One, which shall fight in “Al-Hind” and the other, which shall accompany Isa ibn Maryam (Jesus) [on his return]." (Sunan An Nisai, Vol 4, Book of Jihad, Ch: 41)
This text has been narrated by the following chain of narrators:
Mohammad ibn Abd Allah ibn Abd Al-Rahim --> Asad ibn Musa -–> Baqiyyah -–> Abu Bakr Al-Zubaidi -–> Muhammad ibn Al-Walid Al-Zubaidi -–> Luqman ibn `aamir -–> Abd Al-a`laa ibn `adiy Al-bahraaniy -–> Thauba’n -–> The Prophet (PBUH)
1. Asad ibn Musa
The full name of Asad ibn Musa is “Asad ibn Musa ibn Ibraheem ibn Al-waleed ibn `abd Al-malik ibn Marwaan ibn Al-hakam” . Ibn Hajar , in his book “Tehzeeb al-tehzeeb” has quoted sayings of Ibn Yunus , Ibn Hazam and `abd Al-Haq , besides a number of others’ regarding Asad
ibn Musa . Ibn Yunus says that Asad ibn Musa has narrated a number of abominable (Munkar) narratives. According to Ibn Hazam , Asad ibn Musa is abominable in his narratives and is a weak narrator. `abd Al-Haq says that he does not hold Asad ibn Musa’s narratives as
acceptable to be presented as a basis for arguments
2. Baqiyyah
Asad ibn Musa has narrated this text from “Baqiyyah” . The full name of Baqiyyah is: “Baqiyyah ibn Al-Waleed ibn Al-Sa’id” .
Al-Dhahabi, in his book “ Meezaan al-Ai`tidaal ” writes that more than one person has stated that Baqiyyah ascribes his narratives to such people from whom he has not heard these narratives. Al-Dhahabi has also quoted Ibn Habban as saying that Baqiyyah ascribes to reliable narrators such sayings which he heard from weak and unacceptable narrators. Al-Dhahabi has also cited similar comments (given below) of Abu Haatim , Abu Mus’har , Abu Is’haq Al-juzjaniy , Ibn Khuzaimah , Ahmad ibn Hanbal , `abd Al-Haq and Abu Al-Hasan ibn Al-Qattaan .
Abu Haatim says: “His ( Baqiyyah’s ) narratives are not acceptable to be presented as a basis of an argument”. Abu Mus’har gave his opinion about Baqiyyah in the form of a poetic verse, which means: “Narratives of Baqiyyah are not clean, so guard yourself against them”. Abu Is’haq Al-juzjaniy says: “May God have mercy on Baqiyyah , he quoted worthless narratives without caring to check who was he taking such narratives from”. Ibn Khuzaimah says: I do not hold Baqiyyah’s narratives as acceptable to be presented as a basis of an argument. Ahmad ibn Hanbal is narrated to have said: “I thought that Baqiyyah only narrated acceptable narratives by ascribing them to unknown people. But then I found that he also narrates unacceptable narratives by (wrongly) ascribing them to known and reliable narrators”. `abd Al-Haq says: “ Baiyyah’s narratives cannot be presented as a basis of an argument”. Abu Al-Hasan ibn Al-qattan says: “ Baiyyah (wrongly) ascribed his narratives to people and did not see any harm in doing so. If this is correct, it renders him unacceptable”. Al-Dhahabi , commenting on this statement of Abu Al-Hasan writes: “By God, this is definitely correct”.
Al-`uqailiy in his book “Dhu`afaa Al-`uqailiy” quotes Waqee` as saying: “I have not heard any person who was more daring than Baiyyah in ascribing something to the Prophet (pbuh). Al-`uqailiy has also quoted Ibn Al-Mubarak as saying: “He (Baqiyyah) would accept a saying from just about anyone [without checking his reliability]”. Al-`uqailiy has also cited Ahmad ibn Hanbal as saying: “ Baqiyyah did not care much about whom he was quoting from”.
Al-hafiz Al-Mazi in his book “Tehzeeb Al-Kamaal fi Asma’ Al-rijaal” has cited Yahya ibn Mu`een as saying: “He (Baqiyyah) would narrate a hundred narratives from weak and unacceptable narrators before he would quote one from a reliable narrator”. He has also quoted Ya`qoob as saying: He (Baqiyyah) narrates from people whose narratives have been dropped and also from people who are weak and unacceptable in their narratives”.
Ibn Hajar in his book “ Tehzeeb al-Tehzeeb ” has cited Abu Ahmad Al-Haakim as saying: He (Baqiyyah) has quoted narratives from Al-Awza`iy , Al-Zubaidiy and `ubaid Allah Al-`umariy narratives that seem to be lies”. Ibn Hajar has also quoted Khateeb as saying: “Among his narratives are abominable ones”. He has also quoted Al-Baihaqiy as saying: “There is a consensus regarding the fact that Baqiyyah is not fit to be presented as a basis of an argument”.
3. Abu Bakr Al-Zubaidi
The full name of Abu Bakr was “Abu Bakr ibn Al-Waleed ibn `aamir Al-Zubaidiy” .
Not much could be found about Abu Bakr in books about the lives of people who have narrated sayings of the Prophet (pbuh). The little that was found is not very encouraging. Ibn Hajar in his book “Taqreeb Al-tehzeeb” writes: His life and character is not known”.
Al-Hafiz Al-Mazi’ in his book “Tehzi’b Al-Kamaal fi Asma’ Al-Rijaal” and Ibn Hajar in his book “Tehzeeb Al-tehzeeb” write: Only Baqiyyah has narrated from him”. This fact renders the narrator quite unreliable.
4. Muhammad ibn Al-Walid Al-Zubaidi:
Hafiz Ibn Hajar in his book Tehzeeb Al-tehzeeb has cited Al-Khalili as saying: “His (Mohammad ibn Al-Waleed Al-Zubaidiy’s) narratives are reliable, if they are reported by a reliable narrator”. This really means that the narratives of Muhammad ibn Al-Waleed have generally been accepted by the experts of the field. However, the case of the particular narrative under consideration is quite different. This narrative has been reported from Muhammad ibn Al-Waleed , by his brother, Abu Bakr ibn Al-Waleed , who is not even a known person. Thus the condition of acceptability of Muhammad ibn Al-Waleed’s narrative, given by Al-Khalili (i.e. His narratives are reliable, if they are reported by a reliable narrator) is not fulfilled in this particular narrative of Muhammad ibn Al-Waleed
5. Abd Al-A`laa ibn `adiy Al-Bahraaniy:
The comments regarding Abd Al-A`laa ibn `adiy Al-Bahraaniy although are generally quite positive, as he has generally been termed as a reliable and truthful person. But authorities like Ibn Al-qattaan have also said that “his (Abd Al-a`laa’s) position as a narrator is not well known” (As reported in Ibn Hajar’s “Tehzeeb Al-tehzeeb” )
-
---
So, out of the five people in this chain of narrators, two, as per classic Hadith scholars, are not acceptable as the basis of an argument, one is completely unknown, and the remaining two are either conditionally acceptable or not well-known.
But as per al-Albani, this is a Sahih narration. He says the narrators are trustworthy, except Abu Bakar Al-Zubaidi, who is unknown (Majhool). But as Abdullah Ibn Saalim has narrated from him elsewhere (and Ibn Saalim himself is a trustworthy narrator), this narration can be accepted. However, a number of authorities contradict him, and according to them, no one other than Baqiyyah has reported from Al-Zubaidi. Albani, however, concedes that Baqiyyah has been a known 'Mudallis' who may have repented.
Interestingly, Hafiz Zubair Alizai of Dar-us-Salam has used exactly the same argument as al-Albani (less the supposed repentance of Baqiyyah) and graded the Hadith as 'Hasan'.
If anyone still believes that this Hadith is totally authentic and reliable, then it's his own choice.
As for 'Hasan' vs 'Sahih', they are not the same. Hasan Ahadith were originally a part of Da'if (weak) Ahadith later separately categorized for legal purposes. Will post details later.
..... Hijaz can be a better name to refer to that area. The Elephants were used by attacking force that weren't native to Hijaz hmmmmm may be from Ethopia (we will have to confirm that)
