بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
Equalising a weak ḥadīth with a fabricated ḥadīth is one of the widespread errors of our time. Many individuals in gatherings and social media platforms very recklessly enforce the idea that the rulings of sharīʿah are restricted to only authentic narrations (& unquestionably the Qurʾān) when this is absolutely not the case; as stated by the bulk of the muḥaddithūn, fuqahā, uṣuliyyūn etc. Sure, the catchphrase: “Qurʾān and authentic ḥadīth!” sounds appealing and apparently seems legitimate but this is an erroneous misrepresentation of the practice of the majority of the scholars of the early centuries. We must read what the stance of the previous ʿulamā, namely, the leading muḥaddithūn and fuqahā is regarding this matter.
The author of the book Khuṭūrat Musāwāt al-Ḥadīth aḍ-Ḍaʿīf bi al-Ḥadīth al-Mawḍūʿ has mentioned how many present-day youngsters senselessly look at weak narrations with hatred and cast it aside, as if it is completely valueless, without realising that the ummah (including Imām Ibn Taymiyyah + Ibn al-Qayyim, who are commonly quoted as scholars who only use authentic narrations) have done ijmāʿ upon the fact that weak narrations can be used for encouragement, good deeds, stories and the like. Furthermore, a magnitude of the scholars of the salaf have used weak narrations for establishing aḥkām (juridical rulings) in chapters wherein no other ḥadīth is found, provided three conditions are met.
Among these scholars are: the four imams, who have given precedence to weak, and even mursal aḥadīth over qiyās (analogy) in chapters where no other ḥadīth is found. Other ḥadīth scholars like Imām Nasaʾī, Abū Dawūd, Thawrī, Awzāʿī, among others have also adopted this. Imām Ibn al-Qayyim states: “…and that is the methodology of the mainstream scholars.” Another reason, the author mentions, why a weak narration may be acted upon in an Islamic ruling is when the ummah has received it with acceptance (تلقي بالقبول) and it has been passed and practiced upon generation after generation, upon which there is a consensus.
Why do ʿulamā act upon weak narrations?
I will suffice by mentioning the first three reasons which the author has mentioned:
- Due to the prophetic saying: “Narrate from the people of the book, there is no blame.” If this is the case with the saying of the people of the book, which clearly has the possibility of having undergone distortion, then what about the aḥādīth of the Prophet (ṣal Allāhu ʿalayhī wa-sallam)?
- A chain containing a weak narrator makes the ḥadīth weak, but it does not mean that in every ḥadīth that that narrator has narrated, he has made a mistake in it. It can happen that the ḥadīth is sound, but has only been classified as weak due to the narrator’s weak memory.
- A ḥadīth may be ḍaʿīf but has elevated to the level of ḥasan (li ghairihi) after the combination of several narrations.
Differences between ḍaʿīf & mowḍūʿ:
I will suffice by mentioning three points:
- A ḥadīth is weak (ḍaʿīf) due to human deficiencies like weak memory, doubting, making a mistake whilst a ḥadīth is fabricated due to evil intentions such as corrupting the religion, aiding in making the prohibited seem permissible, etc.
- A weak ḥadīth has the possibility of truly being a statement of the Prophet (ṣal Allāhu ʿalayhī wa-sallam) whilst a fabricated ḥadīth can never be his statement.
- A weak ḥadīth has been narrated since the era of the saḥābah since they would narrate by removing a tabiʿī or sahābī whilst fabricated narrations are innovations that have never been acted upon and were concocted many decades or centuries after.
Overall, the author has adopted a convincing and systematic approach whilst clarifying the stance of the previous scholars as well as mentioning the differences between the two types of ḥadīth and the great error of equalising between them. Students of knowledge in general and student of ḥadīth in specific must read this book to develop a balanced approach to these matters.
And Allāh alone is the giver of ability
Hadithiyya 