The addition in the hadith: "Curse them, for they are cursed," how authentic is it?

The questioner : The questioner says: Some people weaken the addition to the hadith . If this addition is authentic, how is the method of cursing to be carried out?

The Shaykh : Those who weaken this addition are, in reality, beginners in this science. They assume that any narrator about whom a criticism is made has weak hadiths, but that is not the case. There are rules, as we have advised you to learn the principles of jurisprudence and the principles of hadith, so that a student of knowledge does not fall into error, either in jurisprudence or in hadith. There are rules in the terminology that state: "Criticism is given precedence over vindication, provided the reason for the criticism is explained." After this explanation, one must observe: is this explained criticism one that, in itself, invalidates reliance on this narrator's hadith, or is it a criticism that may or may not be a criticism?
We know from studying the history of many of the imams of hadith and their memorizers that some of them were severe in their criticism, and would invalidate reliance on a man for the slightest reason. For example, it was said to one of them: Why do you not narrate from him? He said: Because I saw him riding a mule. I do not know if the mule is known to you in your country. A mule is a horse or a type of horse, but it is fleshy and small in size, and its gait differs from the gait of the known horse; its gait is fast, it walks like this, and by the nature of the rider, he sways like this, as if he is walking with arrogance. This was, until recently, ridden by a specific class of people in our Syria, namely the tax collectors who used to collect bread from the bakers who bake the bread. At that time, they bought wheat from the mills, before these calamities came to many of the lands of the Muslims, which are called socialist and others, where the state took over all the facilities of the nation. So the flour, wheat, and barley were free at that time. The merchant miller would buy as much wheat as he wished, grind it, and the bakers would buy from them their daily need, not paying the money until after a month or two. These millers had tax collectors who rode these mules. They would walk in the streets and pass by the bakers, collecting the price of that flour. This type of horse, called a mule, has this gait that suggests to the observer and the rider that he is walking with arrogance. So that hadith scholar said: "I saw him riding a mule." If we look closely, this is not considered a criticism. Did he ride it out of arrogance, or did he ride it out of necessity? One cannot say that everyone who rides this mule rides it out of arrogance. Just as if we suppose today, for example, that a person who has been granted wealth—as is the case in your country—rides a car, and it is known in our country as a Cadillac, meaning it is excellent and automatic and I do not know what else, then it cannot be said that whenever he rides this car, his narration is invalid because he rode it out of arrogance. A noble, humble man might ride it, and an arrogant man might also ride it.
In summary: A narrator who has been criticized does not lose his status of consideration, nor is reliance on his hadith invalidated, unless he is criticized with an open criticism. You will find in the biographies of some men different opinions, some of whom authenticate him, and some of whom weaken him. Some beginners in this science assume that since the man is spoken about, the hadith is weak. No, there is a rank between the man whose hadith is weak and the man whose hadith is authentic, and that is the one whose hadith is good. This is a matter of precision such that al-Hafiz al-Dhahabi (may Allah have mercy on him)—who is one of those you know for his memorization and critique, and the author of the famous book "Al-Mizan al-I'tidal fi Naqd al-Rijal"—said: "One of the most precise sciences of hadith is distinguishing the good hadith between the authentic and the weak." So this person who wants to judge this hadith as weak: do you think he has reached this rank or come close to it, such that he can distinguish the good hadith from the weak and the authentic, given al-Dhahabi's statement that this is one of the most precise sciences of hadith?
In summary: This is haste on the part of some students of knowledge, our brothers, whom Allah (Mighty and Majestic) has expanded their hearts for engaging in this noble science, where the great men and shaykhs have turned away from it. We advise them to continue in this study and not to hasten in issuing the judgments they adopt or that appear to them. This is with regard to the answer concerning the rank of the hadith.
As for the answer to the second part of the question: which is, assuming the hadith is established, its application is, as we have said more than once, like applying the rule established by the Messenger (peace be upon him) regarding enjoining good and forbidding evil, when he said: "Whoever among you sees an evil, let him change it with his hand, and if he cannot, then with his tongue, and if he cannot, then with his heart, and that is the weakest of faith."
There is no difference, O Muslim, between seeing a woman walking in the street in a state of tabarruj (display of adornment) or a man exposing his thighs. This man has opposed the Shari'ah, and that woman has opposed the Shari'ah. So what do you do? If you were in a state that rules by Islam, the least you could do is rebuke him—not with a stick—but I say with words, you rebuke him, and you order him to cover his 'awrah, and he has no way over you. But today, if you did any of that, it might be that in some lands his fate would be prison. Therefore, we have noticed today this dissolution and the absence of a supporter for those who enjoin good and forbid evil. We see evils prevalent in the streets, and we are content with forbidding with the heart, and we say perhaps with our tongues to ourselves: O Allah, this is an evil we do not accept.
So this evil—which is the woman in a state of tabarruj—is like any other evil. Can you change it with your tongue at least today? You cannot, because she will say, "I am free, and what do you have to do with me?" and perhaps she will call the police, and the police will take you to the station, and perhaps after that, bad things will happen to me, and we do not know what the consequences will be. So if you are unable to admonish her, then this legal ruling is said between you and her—between you and yourself—and you do not let her hear it if you are afraid. But if you are not afraid of anything, then the ruling is to let her hear it, in order to deter her from this great sin.
Yes.