What does a “weak” hadeeth mean exactly? Do we not believe in it? Or do we have doubts about it with a possibility that it could’ve been reported from the Messenger of Allah (sallallaahu ‘alayhe wa sallam)? What are we supposed to think of a ‘weak’ hadith? Please explain in detail, in shaa’ Allah.
A “weak” hadeeth refers to a narration that is attributed to the Messenger (sallallaahu ‘alayhe wa sallam), but it has not passed the stringent conditions observed by the scholars of Hadeeth to be considered saheeh or hasan, meaning: authentic. When a hadeeth is classified as dha’eef (weak, or unauthentic), it basically means that we can not believe it to be from the Messenger (sallallaahu ‘alayhe wa sallam), due to one of these two basic reasons:
- A narrator in the chain has been identified as having a poor memory, or memory lapses, or another fault that causes doubt in his ability to narrate precisely, or something is known that has led the scholars of Hadeeth to believe that he erred in this hadeeth specifically.
- A break in the chain of narration has been identified.
If you have understood what is intended by ruling on a hadeeth that it is dha’eef (weak, unauthentic), then you should know that we do not believe in it or act upon it. Our position on it is that it has been narrated as a hadeeth, but we can not confirm it to be from our Messenger (sallallaahu ‘alayhe wa sallam).
This is unless it is further classified as munkar (weak and contradictory in meaning) or mowdhoo’ (fabricated), not just dha’eef.
And Allaah knows best.
Written by: Moosaa Richardson
There’s a Hadith being circulated on the internet that says the Prophet alayhissalatuwassalam said, “Ask your heart. The best mufti is the heart of a muttaqi.” What is the level of this Hadith?
“Ask your heart” might be a translation of ( استفت قلبك ), from the hadeeth of Waabisah collected by Imam Ahmad and others, which seems to be weak. However, I have never heard of the remainder of the “hadeeth”. Please ask whoever is spreading it for a source, and let me know.
Assalamu alaykum
What is the ruling on using weak hadith in Fadaail? Some Ulema have mentioned this like Imam an-Nawawi. Also those that say this mention Imam al-Bukharee allowed using weak hadith in Fadaail and they use the weak hadith included in Adab al Mufrad as evidence. Is this an issue were there is permissible differing?
wa ‘alaykas-salaam. Yes, Hasan, some scholars allow using slightly weak, not very weak (dha’eef jiddan) or fabricated narrations, in encouragements, with the following conditions:
(1) That it is narrated with “tamreedh” wording, meaning: It is not claimed that it is authentic, rather a phrase like, “It has been reported…” is used to indicate its weakness. So it is not believed to be authentic, nor is it narrated in a way which indicates that.
(2) That it does not establish anything new in Islaam, so it must encourage actions already sanctioned in the Quran and authentic hadeeth.
(3) The weakness of the chain is slight, not serious. (as mentioned)
Scholars who do not support this position remark: What is the point? Just rely on what has been preserved through authentic narrations. Since it may only be used to encourage things already legislated (in other authentic evidences), then why not just stick to what has been authentically narrated? And that is a good understanding, and Allaah knows best.
Baarakallahu Feek akhi
Was this opinion known from the early Muhaditheen?
As mentioned, al-Haafith an-Nawawee [d.676]. And while the position being attributed to Imaam al-Bukhaaree might be debatable, there were imaams in his time or earlier that talked about a stern approach to the chains of narrations related to halaal and haraam, compared to a more relaxed approach to the chains of narrations encouraging good deeds. This position has been relayed from at least three early imaams of the Salaf: Sufyaan ath-Thowree, ‘Abdur-Rahmaan ibn Mahdee, and Ahmad ibn Hanbal. Reports from Sufyaan and Ibn Mahdee are found in al-Jaami’ li Akhlaaq ar-Raawee of al-Khateeb [d.463], v.2, p.91. And add al-Khateeb to the list of early imaams with this position, too. And Allaah knows best.
With regards to the narration from the three Imaams you are referring to then firstly this saying is not proven from Imaam Ahmed with an authentic chain. The chain of this saying of Imaam Ahmed is severely weak due to the narrator, Abul Abbas Ahmed bin Muhammad as-Sijzi, and Abu Abdullah al-Naufli.
[See: Lisaan al-Mizaan: 1/253, 252 & 1/167]
Also for them leniency was taking the Hasan hadeeth according to Shaykh Ahmad Shaakir, you may find this interesting.
al-Allaamah Ahmad Shaakir says:
‘and as for what Imaam Ahmad bin Hanbal and Abdurrahmaan bin Mahdi, and Abdullaah bin al-Mubaarak said, “when it is narrated to us pertaining to Halaal wal Haraam we are strict. And when it is narrated to us pertaining to Fadaa’il al-A’maal (the rewards and excellence of actions) then we are lenient.” -then they mean, according to what I find to be most convincing – and Allaah knows best – that the leniency was in their taking the hasan hadeeth, that which does not reach the level of saheeh. Because the convention of distinguishing between the Saheeh and Hasan was not present at their time…rather many of the early scholars did not describe a hadeeth except by it being saheeh or da’eef only.’
[‘al-Baa’ith al-Hatheeth’ (pg.101) of Ahmad Shaakir.]
Allah Knows best.
Dear brother or sister,
[1] You are talking about one chain in one of the books of hadeeth, while I do not know any of the scholars who would challenge this being the position of Imaam Ahmad. Do you really believe finding a problem with one chain is sufficient to negate this as his position, when it is widely known and quoted by the scholars as his position?
Related point of benefit: Writing under your real name would likely cause you to contemplate more carefully before writing for the public. [Many benefits of using your real name mentioned here]
[2] What al-‘Allaamah Ahmad Shaakir said was also stated by other scholars who wished to discount the position of those who allowed narrating weak hadeeths to encourage virtue. However, it is in opposition to what al-Haakim, al-Khateeb, and other early scholars who wrote in Mustalah (Hadeeth Sciences) understood from their statements.
Related point of benefit: There is a dangerous movement found in some modern writers about Hadeeth Sciences which tries to convince people that everyone after the year 400 basically corrupted the correct understanding of the “early scholars” (mutaqddimoon). Perhaps a distinguishing sign of this movement would be that they would accept al-Haakim’s understanding of the topic, but not that of al-Khateeb, in this discussion. And Allaah knows best.
If you think I have said anything wrong in my comment please remove it. I took this from another website that tried to answer the claim Imam Ahmad held this view.
So let me get this straight, if there is a weak hadith with slight weakness that mentions, for example, a phrase of dhikr that is not mentioned in any Sahih hadith can we act upon the weak hadith seeking reward through that phrase of dhikr? The Sufis tend to use this ruling in that way and attribute it to Imam an-Nawawi.
May Allaah bless you for asking, Ibn Ghulam! The case you mentioned involves establishing a new practice. For those scholars who would allow narrating a weak hadeeth to encourage some virtuous practice, that practice must already be established through authentic evidence.
For example, many scholars consider the hadeeth which indicates prayer after using a miswak (tooth-stick) being 70 times better than ordinary prayers as a weak hadeeth. According to those who allow the narration of weak hadeeths, they would say it is allowable to narrate this weak hadeeth to encourage people to use miswaks before prayers, since the Sunnah of using a miswak before prayer is established in many authentic evidences. And Allaah knows best.
So would the scholar that mentions the weak hadith about miswaak believe that it is true and the prayer will by 70 times greater or is it narrated purely for encouragement?
If the scholar believes the hadeeth is dha’eef (weak), then this means he does not believe it is established from the Messenger of Allaah (may Allaah raise his rank and grant him peace), so the answer is: NO, he does not believe the content to be true. Some of the scholars who hold this position include this as a condition for mentioning a weak hadeeth to encourage virtues, that the one who acts by it does not believe it to be established authentically. And Allaah knows best.
May Allah bless you for clarifying this Ustaadh, this is indeed a confusing issue to many.
I have a question. Some of the Tablighis defend the weak narrations in their famous kitaab “Fadhail e Amaal” using the fact that some scholars, as you mentioned allow using weak narration in encouragement. Is this argument justified?
Maybe you could make a new post further elaborating and clarifying this topic of using weak hadith in Fadaail.
I came across this today: “It is reported that just because of his happiness at the birth of his nephew (the Prophet
SAW), Abu Lahab’s punishment in the fire will be lessened on Mondays.” is this an authentic hadeeth?Firstly, it is dha’eef (unauthentic) because of a broken chain of transmission. Then, it is not even a hadeeth if the chain weren’t broken! Furthermore, it is contradictory to a clear ruling repeated many times throughout Allaah’s Book – that the people of the Hellfire shall NOT have their punishment lightened up. See: 2:162, 3:88, 16:85, and 35:36 for some examples. As well, scholars have cited ijmaa’ (total scholarly consensus) over the disbelievers not having their punishments in the Hereafter reduced. And Allaah knows best.
Regarding the usage of “SAW” in place of actually sending salaat and salaam upon the Messenger (sallallaahu ‘alayhe wa sallam), read this important article: https://www.bakkah.net/en/saw-saws-pbuh.htm
assalaam ‘alaikum,
ahsaanallaahu ilayk ustaadh, when scholars explain the different categories in hadeeth sciences they make a distinction between the matn and the isnaad. Could you maybe (briefly) explain what this means? So for example:
:الفرق بين المقطوع والمنقطع
المنقطع من مباحث علم الإسناد
والمقطوع من مباحث علم المتن
Djazaakallaahu gair
wa ‘alaykas-salaamu wa rahmatullaah. Maqtoo’ and munqati’ are sometimes used synonymously for a chain with a break in it. Sometimes, they are used for different issues: Maqtoo’ would be a description of where the chain ends, at a taabi’ee (vs. mowqoof which ends at a Companion), meaning the chain ends there and the report is about what a tabi’ee said or did. It is not saheeh or dha’eef because of where it ends. Munqati’ would carry the meaning of a broken chain when its specific meaning is intended (i.e. munqati’ but not maqtoo’). A munqati’ chain with this meaning is unauthentic due to the break in the chain. And Allaah knows best.
Ustaadh, if the chain is maqtoo’, you said it is neither saheeh nor dha’eef. Then what is it? If the chain ends at a taabi’ee who’s integrity and precision is of the highest level and the other narrators in the chain are also at the highest level of integrity and precision, then what is done with that hadeeth? Another thing I wanted to understand is that is it possible that a hadeeth which didn’t conform to the stringent criteria for authenticity set by the scholars was actually narrated by the Prophet (peace be upon Him) but was not accepted because of these criteria?
1-“If the chain is maqtoo’, you said it is neither saheeh nor dha’eef. Then what is it?” It is either saheeh or dha’eef based on its chain. Maqtoo’ is not a description of authenticity though. Its like a Makkan chain or a sudaasee (6-person) chain. It may be authentic or not, based on its narrators and the connectivity of its chain.
2-“If the chain ends at a taabi’ee who’s integrity and precision is of the highest level and the other narrators in the chain are also at the highest level of integrity and precision, then what is done with that hadeeth?” It is the statement of a taabi’ee (student of the Companions), likely a beneficial statement, but it is not revelation from Allaah.
3-“Is it possible that a hadeeth which didn’t conform to the stringent criteria for authenticity set by the scholars was actually narrated by the Prophet (peace be upon Him) but was not accepted because of these criteria?” No, not if you have understood what the point of the Science of Hadeeth is all about. It is possible that human error causes a certain scholar to error in judgment, misapply the science, and mistakenly disqualify an authentic hadeeth, and you would find that being explained by other scholars. And Allaah knows best.
Assalaamu `alaikum.
Ustaadh, I have a doubt with regards to your second point. So, even if this Taabi`ee (of utmost trustworthiness, a Thiqah) relates the narration as “The Prophet (salAllaahu `alaihi wa sallam) said such and such”, and the narrators leading up to the Taabi`ee are all Thiqah, then since the chain ends with the Taabi`ee (i.e. it is Maqtoo`), we consider it only as being a statement of the Taabi`ee and not a Hadeeth of the Prophet (salAllaahu `alaihi wa sallam)?
In short, is it the case that only Marfoo` chains are attributed to the Prophet (salAllaahu `alaihi wa sallam) and Mawqoof and Maqtoo` chains are attributed to the Companion or Taabi`ee respectively; regardless of the level of authenticity of the narrators?
Wa ‘alayk as-salaamu wa rahmatullaah. What a taabi’ee says from himself is called MAQTOO’ (sometimes called MOWQOOF too, or KHABAR, or ATHAR); what he attributes to the Prophet (sallallaahu ‘alayhe wa sallam) without mentioning his chain to him is called MURSAL. MURSAL is not authentic, as the chain is broken. It is the best of the broken chains, yet it is still not authentic because it is missing the condition of connectivity of the chain. A MAQTOO’ narration can be authentic or not based on the chain up to the taabi’ee. And Allaah knows best.
JazaakAllaahu khayr Ustaadh. I confused myself with regards to a Chain Description and a Chain Grading.
Salam alaikum
I have seen a hadith on the internet, I don’t know how known this hadith is, but I could not find it in authentic sources. And someone even wrote “according to Muslim” but after googling I found a website saying that these both hadiths are forgeries.. Also those who mention this hadith on the internet, they don’t even mention any source so it seems like it might be fabricated. I mean this hadith..
“The stomach is the central basin of the body, and the veins are connected to it. When the stomach is healthy, it passes on its condition to veins, and in turn the veins will circulate the same and when the stomach is putrescence, the veins will absorb such putrescence and issue the same”.
Wa ‘alayk as-salaamu wa rahmatullaah. The meaning you are asking about resembles a hadeeth collected by Aboo Nu’aym, at-Tabaraanee and others, allegedly from the report of Aboo Hurayrah, allegedly attributed to the Messenger of Allaah (صلى الله عليه وسلم) the following wording in Arabic:
المعدة حوض البدن، والعروق إليها واردة، فإذا صحت المعدة صدرت العروق بالصحة، وإذا فسدت المعدة صدرت العروق بالسقم
The translation of which would be roughly what you have quoted, and Allaah knows best. Ath-Thahabee mentioned this report in the biography of Ibraaheem ibn Jurayj ar-Rahaawee in his book, Meezaan Ali’tidaal, and mentioned that ad-Daaraqutnee (the great early imaam highly skilled in identifying defective narrations) said that this report is NOT from the speech of our Messenger (may Allaah raise his rank and grant him peace). Other scholars called this narration BAATIL (terribly false), and others: MOWDHOO’ (fabricated). See also: Silsilat al-Ahaadeeth ad-Dha’eefah (#1692), and the ‘Elal of ad-Daarqutnee (8/42).
So to simplify this: This report is CERTAINLY NOT in Saheeh Muslim. It is possible that it may be found in some other books authored by Imaam Muslim (not stipulated to be entirely authentic like his Saheeh Compilation), so the statement, “collected by Muslim” might possible have a basis (and Allaah knows best). With that, whoever tries to pass this off as an authentic hadeeth is attributing a false narration to our Messenger (may Allaah raise his rank and grant him peace). Whoever has done so (unknowingly) should fear Allaah, repent to Allaah, spread this response and clarification to anyone they sent the alleged hadeeth to (to correct what they have corrupted), and exercise a MUCH higher level of caution when narrating from the carrier of Allaah’s Sharee’ah (may Allaah raise his rank and grant him peace) in the future, because he said in the well known mutawaatir (widespread, authentic) hadeeth:
من يقل علي ما لم أقل فليتبوأ مقعده من النار
“Whoever attributes to me what I have not said, let him take his seat in the Fire.”
And Allaah knows best.
subhan Allah. this is a good reminder for us all, to not be quick in resharing stuff on the internet without reference.
Jazak Allahu khair for clarifying this.
Barak Allahu feek