The conditions set by some later memorizers for the permissibility of acting upon weak hadiths in the virtues of deeds; are they correct?

The questioner : The conditions set by some later memorizers for the permissibility of acting upon weak hadiths in the virtues of deeds; are they correct? And if they are correct, is it permissible to act upon them in the virtues of deeds?

The Shaykh : They are undoubtedly correct, indeed obligatory. However, the correct view is that acting upon a weak hadith is not permissible absolutely, except in one case and with one condition: when the hadith contains a legal ruling and mentions a specific virtue for it. In terms of the ruling and its legality, it is established by another hadith, but that other hadith does not contain this specific virtue mentioned in the weak hadith. In this case, it is correct to say: one acts upon the weak hadith in the virtues of deeds. It is not prescribed to act upon a weak hadith in the virtues of deeds; rather, one acts upon it in the virtues of deeds. In this scenario, the virtue of the act, like its prescription, is established by an authentic hadith. As for the specific virtue mentioned in the weak hadith, it is hoped that it is established in reality. Therefore, this weak hadith does not obstruct a legal ruling, because acting upon that ruling is established by other means. The presence or absence of this hadith does not harm or benefit the legality of the ruling, for it is prescribed. However, it is hoped that the virtue mentioned in the weak hadith is something the Muslim will attain.
For example, what falls under this is the virtue, or let us say now, the legality of the Dhuha prayer. The legality of the Dhuha prayer is established by the action of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) in performing it, as reported in more than one hadith of his actions (peace and blessings be upon him and his family). So this action, which carries within it the legality of the Dhuha prayer, does not need a weak hadith to establish its legality. But there is a narrated hadith, I think in Sunan al-Tirmidhi: . This is a weak hadith. If it is narrated and its weakness is clarified, it is said regarding such a case: one acts upon it in the virtues of deeds. Because this meaning applies perfectly. Because the fact that the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) did that is undoubtedly among the virtues of deeds, because it is an act of worship. So when this weak hadith comes, it is said: one acts upon it in the virtues of deeds—meaning: it is narrated. But it should be clarified that it is weak when it is narrated. This aligns with some of the conditions he mentioned. But these conditions do not provide the detail we mentioned; rather, these conditions may imply the permissibility of acting upon a weak hadith even if it legislates an act whose legality is established only by the weak hadith. An example is:
-- And upon you be peace and the mercy of Allah --
It is established in the authentic Sunnah that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him and his family), when he finished placing the deceased in the grave and the digger began to throw dirt on him, he would take three handfuls and throw them into the grave. This is established. But a weak hadith came that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) used to say in the first handful: , in the second: , and in the third: . This hadith is weak. But some of those who dwell on the previous phrase, who act upon weak hadiths in the virtues of deeds absolutely, said when he mentioned this last weak hadith: "And this hadith, although it is weak, it is agreed upon—in his opinion—that it is permissible to act upon weak hadiths in the virtues of deeds." But what contradicts what we mentioned earlier is: from where do we establish the virtue of these three handfuls, along with their division, meaning: with the division of the noble verse upon them? It is not established by an authentic hadith as the original matter is established, the original three handfuls... (peace and blessings be upon him). But this classification and division of the verse upon the three handfuls did not come except through this weak hadith. So here, their saying "one acts upon the weak hadith in the virtues of deeds" is not appropriate. Rather, in this legislation by the weak hadith of something that was not prescribed—namely, pairing the handful with a part of the verse mentioned earlier—therefore, it is not correct to say absolutely that it is permissible to act upon a weak hadith in the virtues of deeds, except in the previous scenario mentioned earlier.
Yes.

The questioner : Is it permissible for me to narrate a weak hadith in the form of a general statement, and then return... to mention it without clarifying its weakness?

The Shaykh : No, it is not permissible. Therefore, we said: it is necessary to clarify its weakness, as stated in that condition, and that the one acting upon it knows that it is weak. One of the drawbacks of this rule is that when we see some people of virtue acting and performing some acts of worship, and there is only a weak hadith for them, when it is rebuked, what do they say? They say: "Yes, if the hadith is weak, one acts upon weak hadiths in the virtues of deeds." This gives us a warning that when he was acting upon this hadith, he did not know whether it was authentic or weak? Therefore, he rushes to say that if it is as you say, it is permissible to act upon weak hadiths in the virtues of deeds. And thus, the cause of the spread of this rule, without clarifying it by one of two ways: the correct way we mentioned earlier, which is derived from the words of Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah, and the other way is the conditions mentioned by al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani and others. When these two restrictions were ignored, it spread among people, even among scholars, to act upon weak hadiths absolutely. So that became a cause for legislating matters that are among the religious innovations (bid'ah) for which it is not permissible to worship or draw near to Allah (Blessed and Exalted is He).
Therefore, if we set aside the issue of acting upon weak hadiths in the virtues of deeds, it is not permissible for a Muslim to narrate a hadith while knowing its weakness without clarifying its weakness. Because it is undoubtedly advice to the Muslim community, especially if this narrator of the weak hadith is a role model for people, such that when they are told by some scholars: "This hadith is weak," they will say to you: "How? I heard this hadith fromThe Shaykh : So-and-so and the scholar So-and-so. And this is very, very natural among the general people, for they argue with what the scholars do. Among that is their saying: "The Messenger of Allah said in the weak hadith." So, without doubt, in this state, they have fallen into the danger of contradicting the saying of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him and his family): . Therefore, the scholars of hadith in the past, when they narrated a weak hadith, would present it with its chain of narration, so that the people of knowledge could know the hadith from its chain. As for the reality of the later scholars of hadith, who mention the hadith with the chain omitted, it is necessary in this state that a summary of the chain be mentioned. It should be said: "This hadith has a weak, good, or authentic chain," according to the ruling it deserves. Therefore, it is not permissible to mention a weak hadith without its weakness being clarified, especially if some people are acting upon it.
Yes.