If al-Bukhari does not accept weak hadiths, why did he include some weak hadiths in his book Al-Adab al-Mufrad?

The questioner :
As for al-Bukhari, he does not accept weak hadiths. If he does not accept them, why did he include some weak hadiths in Al-Mufrad?
Some people claim that he accepts weak hadiths.

The Shaykh :
This "some people," my brother, and I say this without offense, are climbing up on the science of hadith, because if he were truly a student of the science of
, he would say that all the imams of hadith accept this weak hadith, because all the imams of hadith narrate from weak hadiths.
And to add to the error—and I do not say misguidance—he would say that all the imams of hadith accept the
very weak hadith, because they narrate very weak hadiths. And to add to the error—and I do not say misguidance either—this is the end of the matter. One day he will say that all the imams of hadith accept fabricated hadiths. Why?
Because they narrated them. What is the answer? The answer, my brother, is that the scholars of hadith, when they narrate hadiths with their chains of narration, that is a mercy from Allah the Exalted to the early generations of His servants, and a facilitation for them to collect the Sunnah for those who come after them to study it.
And there is no way to do that except by narrating what came to them through this chain. And among what the scholars of terminology say is a phrase that contains
knowledge, and that is their saying to the student of hadith science, as advisors: "Gather, then search." And there is no doubt that when the scholars of hadith
advise the students of this science with this advice, it necessarily means that they themselves practiced it. So what did they do? They gathered and then
searched. "Gathering" means collecting, i.e., sweeping up from wherever it was, and then weighing it. Gather, then search.
But unfortunately, most students of knowledge in hadith, and indeed most scholars of hadith, took some of this phrase and left out the rest. They gathered but did not search. They stopped at the first phrase. Most scholars of hadith
are like this. Therefore, how many books of hadith, in terms of collecting chains and texts, do you find? You find hundreds of books, even thousands, if we do not say millions. But how many books do you find in the science of hadith that are authentic? It does not come to your mind except
Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim. And if one of you is a bit hard on himself, he might mention, for example, Sahih Ibn Hibban, he might
mention Sahih Ibn Khuzaymah, he might mention al-Mustadrak of al-Hakim, he might mention al-Muntaqa of Ibn al-Jarud, and finally, it might come to his mind
al-Ahadith al-Mukhtarah of al-Diya' al-Maqdisi. And that is it. How many books have we counted? Less than ten. Why? Because the process of
searching is a difficult process, and it requires patience, diligence, and follow-up, in addition to knowledge of the science of hadith terminology
and men, etc. We return to this. So this person who says that Imam al-Bukhari accepted the weak hadith, where did
he learn this? From the book Al-Adab al-Mufrad. What is in Al-Adab al-Mufrad? There are hadiths with their chains of narration. What
is in the Musnad of Imam Ahmad? Hadiths with their chains of narration. What is the difference between Al-Adab al-Mufrad and the Musnad of Imam Ahmad?
No difference at all. If we are going to add knowledge, we will say, my brother, it is not just Imam al-Bukhari who accepts the weak hadith.
Imam Ahmad also does, but we will proceed with it in the end. And we will say that all scholars of hadith, as we said, accept the weak hadith. But what does this man and his like mean in their saying "accepts"?
The matter has precision. What does he mean by the word "accepts"? Does he mean that he narrates? If he means this, we have supported and
backed him, and we said that all scholars of hadith narrate the weak hadith, the very weak hadith, and the fabricated
. So what does he gain from his saying that al-Bukhari accepts the weak hadith? And if he does not mean this meaning for the word "accepts"
in the sense of narrating, we say to him, and we ask you in his name, what does he mean? If al-Bukhari accepts, does it mean that al-Bukhari
authenticates the weak hadith? He will say no. Does it mean that al-Bukhari argues with the weak hadith? He will say no.
And I will raise such questions against him, and I do not know what the answer will be. So what does he mean?
He argues with it, and Allah knows best.
So it means that al-Bukhari authenticates the weak hadith. And is there any scholar in the world who attributes to anyone
other than al-Bukhari such misguidance? Because the word "argues with," if we study it... in the science of terminology, we find it equals
the authentic hadith in its two categories: the authentic in the highest rank and the authentic in the lower rank, which al-Tirmidhi
and his like call "hasan." So he means that Imam al-Bukhari accepts the weak hadith, meaning he makes it hasan, because the

The questioner:
hasan hadith is an argument in his view. And therefore, al-Tirmidhi himself narrates from al-Bukhari that 'Amr ibn Shu'ayb, from his father, from

The questioner:
his grandfather, argues with his hadith, and in reality, his hadith is in the rank of hasan. Does it mean that in his saying that al-Bukhari accepts
the weak hadith, he argues with it, either in the rank of hasan or in the rank of authenticity? If he means this or
that, then that is clear misguidance. And I do not think you are correct in what you attributed to him.
Why did he not accept it? What does he intend?
This is you asking him so that you can advise him. As for me, I tell you, and I mean what I say, that he himself does not know what he is saying.
He knows and says, "It is said, the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said," and there is no blame on him except for the fabricated one, which
he warns against. And he is one of those who reads the books of hadith terminology, I mean.
What concerns me, what concerns me, is that he says every hadith in Al-Adab al-Mufrad has a hasan chain.

The questioner :
He does not say that. He says he accepts weak hadiths.

The Shaykh :
Be patient. If he does not say every hadith in Al-Adab al-Mufrad has a hasan chain, otherwise you do not know. If you go back to him,

The questioner :
either he will say every hadith in Al-Adab al-Mufrad...
He does not say every hadith...

The Shaykh :
My brother, I have not finished my speech. Either he says that every hadith in Al-Adab al-Mufrad has a hasan chain, in which case

The questioner :
he argues with it, and there is no problem. Or he believes that there are hadiths with weak chains, and yet he says

The Shaykh :
they are accepted, meaning they are hasan. How do you reconcile his saying that there are weak hadiths in it with his saying that these
weak hadiths are accepted, and the meaning of "accepted" is that they are hasan and relied upon? He does not know what he is saying. And if you

The questioner :
want to know the truth and judge this person, if you can, get a recording from him, either on a recorder or

The Shaykh :
with a pen. Ask him what he means by the word "accepted" or "al-Bukhari accepts." Does he mean the rank of hasan? If he says yes, fine, why
does he state that there are weak hadiths in it? How do you reconcile this and that? The summary is that he believes it is possible that
he means what the scholars say: weak hadiths are accepted in the virtues of deeds.
It would be good if he said that.
I think this is what he means. In any case, since the man is not in front of us now,
he is quoting the book Sharh al-Bayquni, which says that al-Bukhari and Muslim do not accept weak hadiths. And therefore
he refutes that and argues, saying, "No, this is a mistake. Rather, they accept weak hadiths. And the evidence for that is what
he included in the book Al-Mufrad. This is greater than that..."

The questioner :
So, my brother, he means accepting weak hadiths in the virtues of deeds. But that is what he means. And ask him,

The Shaykh :
and he will give this answer. His refutation of al-Bayquniyyah is in this field, because the scholars of hadith disagreed on whether weak hadiths are accepted

The questioner :
in the virtues of deeds. So the field became limited to hadiths related to the virtues of
deeds. The majority accepts the weak hadith in the virtues of deeds. Al-Bukhari and Muslim, and Abu Bakr ibn
'Arabi, and others, do not accept the weak hadith in the virtues of deeds. So when he says al-Bukhari accepts

The Shaykh :
weak hadiths, it is not absolute, but in the virtues of deeds. This is what he might mean... He is wrong, or you
And this answer is a refutation of al-Bayquni’s position in this area, because the scholars of hadith differed on whether a weak hadith may be relied upon
in the virtues of actions. So the scope is limited to hadiths related to the virtues of actions.
The majority accepts a weak hadith in the virtues of actions. Al-Bukhari, Muslim, Abu Bakr ibn ‘Arabi, and others do not accept a weak hadith in the virtues of actions.
So when he says that al-Bukhari accepts weak hadiths, it is not absolutely in the virtues of actions. This is what he may mean...
He is mistaken, or you are mistaken.
He made a mistake.