The ruling on mentioning a brother's faults in jest

The questioner:
The authenticity of the hadith of Wathilah.

The Shaykh:
There is no harm in it. The marginal note states that the narrators are wretched. Yes. The marginal note says that in its *'an'anah* (summary narration) lies Makhlad. Al-Mishkat says there is doubt in grading the hadith as good. No, there is no need for another marginal note; one may need to review the *Sunan*, but the meaning is correct. You have a *takhrij* (tracing to sources), so here, if the hadith were not authentic, it would not be permissible, even if there were no hadith; because it falls under , and it falls under harming the believers. Yes. Al-Tirmidhi narrated it from the route of Hafs ibn Ghiyath, from Burd ibn Sinan, from Makhlad, from Wathilah ibn al-Asqa, with this wording. Al-Tirmidhi said: "This is a good, anomalous hadith." Makhlad heard from Wathilah ibn al-Asqa, Anas ibn Malik, and Abu Hind al-Dari. It is said that he did not hear from any of the Companions of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) except from these three. Makhlad al-Shami was known as Abu 'Abdullah, and he was a slave who was freed. Makhlad al-Azdi heard from 'Abdullah ibn 'Amr, and 'Amarah ibn Zadhan narrated from him. I said: The chain is weak because it contains Makhlad al-Shami, who, despite his reliability, was a *tadlis* (concealer of defects), and he used *'an'anah* (summary narration). There is disagreement regarding his hearing from Wathilah, and the stronger view in my opinion is what Abu Hatim said in *al-Mursalat*: he visited Wathilah but did not hear from him; because this reconciles the two sides of the disagreement. And Allah knows best. Some scholars cited a corroborating narration for it, as in the *Hafiz's Answers* regarding the hadith of *al-Mishbah*, from the hadith of Mu'adh: mountain. It was narrated from Khalid ibn Ma'dan that he met seventy of the Companions of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him). I said: Al-Tirmidhi and al-Khatib in his *History* narrated it from the route of Muhammad ibn al-Hasan al-Layth al-Himdhani, from Thawr ibn Yazid, from Khalid ibn Ma'dan, from him, with this wording. And this chain is far from being good, for in addition to being disconnected, it contains Muhammad ibn al-Hasan, whom Ibn Ma'in and Abu Dawud called a liar, as in *Mizan al-I'tidal*. Then al-Dhahabi cited this hadith for him. For this reason, al-Saghani included it in *al-Mawdu'at* (Fabricated Hadiths), and before him, Ibn al-Jawzi included it in *al-Mawdu'at*, saying: "It is not authentic; Muhammad ibn al-Hasan is a liar." Al-Suyuti refuted him in *al-La'ali al-Masnu'ah* by saying: "Al-Tirmidhi narrated it and said: This is a good, anomalous hadith, and it has a corroborating narration." I said: Then he mentioned the corroborating narration from the route of al-Hasan, saying: "They used to say: Whoever accuses his brother of a sin and repents to Allah from it, he will not die until Allah tests him with it." And this hadith, in addition to not being *marfu'* (traced to the Prophet), has Salih ibn Bashir al-Mari in its chain, who is weak, so it does not serve as a corroborating narration due to its weakness and lack of being *marfu'*. In summary, the hadith is weak. And the one who graded the hadith as good based on its corroborating narrations missed the true defect of the hadith of Mu'adh, which is the presence of Muhammad ibn al-Hasan, who is a liar. So do not rejoice in it, for there is no honor in it. It is like every knowledgeable person who is wise. Authentic. Al-Halali, may Allah preserve them, Shaykh Salim al-Halali. May Allah forgive you. The point is that even if the hadith were authentic, it is not permissible, because harming a believer is worse than the dome. We ask Allah for safety. Yes. The hadith's meaning is strong. Its meaning is correct, and the hadith has corroborating narrations that may reach the level of good, but even if it were not authentic, it falls under harming the believers. Yes. What Allah willed for you.

The presenter:
Perfect.

The Shaykh:
If he was joking, may Allah reward you. He says: It is not permissible to joke about one's brother's faults.