Does the silence of al-Mundhiri, Abu Dawud, and al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar indicate the authenticity or goodness of the hadith?

The questioner : The scholars (may Allah have mercy on them) said regarding what al-Mundhiri remained silent about!

The Shaykh : How?

The questioner : The scholars said regarding what al-Mundhiri remained silent about, and likewise Abu Dawud and al-Hafiz.

The Shaykh : Excuse me, what did he remain silent about?

The questioner : Does the silence of al-Mundhiri and al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar, and likewise Abu Dawud, indicate the authenticity or goodness of the hadith?

The Shaykh : As for the silence of Abu Dawud, in reality it has no value, because research and tracking of his book clearly shows that there are dozens, if not hundreds, of hadiths about which he remained silent and which are weak. Among the curiosities of the opinions I have come across is that Imam al-Nawawi sometimes says, regarding some weak hadiths about which Abu Dawud (may Allah have mercy on him) remained silent in his Sunan, that al-Nawawi said: "Abu Dawud only remained silent about it because its weakness is apparent." He remained silent about it because its weakness is apparent. This means that there are weak hadiths about which Abu Dawud remained silent, and their weakness is obvious, let alone other hadiths whose weakness may not be revealed except to critical researchers. The same can be said about what Imam al-Mundhiri remained silent about, but the truth is that Imam al-Mundhiri’s silence regarding what was weak in "Sunan Abu Dawud" is rare, because he took a broad approach in criticizing many of the hadiths about which Abu Dawud remained silent, pointing out that so-and-so is not a reliable narrator. I recall, for example, that Abu Dawud (may Allah have mercy on him) remains silent about many hadiths narrated by Muhammad ibn Ishaq in a connected manner (mu'annan), and it is known that a hadith narrated by Ibn Ishaq in this manner is weak and not to be relied upon. As for the silence of al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar, particularly in his book "Fath al-Bari," it is generally acceptable and good. However, I have found that he sometimes remains silent about hadiths containing a weakness that is classified as weak in "al-Taqrib." In this case, it can be said that he remained silent about it despite the presence of such a weak narrator in his chain because he found a corroborating narration (shahid) or a supporting chain (mutaba'ah), even if he did not mention it when citing the hadith and remaining silent about it. Nevertheless, despite extensive research, we have found hadiths about which he remained silent that contain weakness, and we have not found anything to corroborate or strengthen them.