The Shaykh gives some practical examples in authenticating and weakening hadiths
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : Among the examples suitable to mention now is the hadith that some extremists regarding women, who make it obligatory for her to cover her face and do not settle for merely saying that covering is recommended, rush to weaken. This is the hadith narrated by Abu Dawud with a defective chain, namely his saying (peace and blessings be upon him): . All these people who hold that covering a woman’s face is obligatory agree to weaken this hadith. When they weaken it, they do so by stopping at the chain of the hadith in "Sunan Abu Dawud," and they mention that there is a break or a missing link between Khalid.
The questioner : Ibn Daryak.
The Shaykh : Yes, and between Iyya.
The questioner: Aisha.
The Shaykh : And between whom, the narrator of the hadith?
The questioner: Aisha.
The Shaykh : Aisha, and another defect, which is Sa'id ibn Bashir. They mention these two defects and proceed, so the hadith is weak. Then they ignore some scientific facts, some hadith-related and some precise fiqh-related matters connected to the fiqh mentioned earlier. The hadith-related aspect concerns two matters. The first aspect is that this hadith has a corroborating narration from the hadith of Asma bint Umayyad. It is true that the chain of this corroborating narration contains Abdullah ibn Lahi'a, who is known to be weak due to his poor memory, but this does not prevent the scholar from citing it as evidence. They ignore citing evidence like the hadith of Ibn Lahi'a and settle for saying: it is weak, and the matter is over. As for remembering that a weak narration added to a weak narration equals a strong one, this is the rule mentioned in terminology, which I sometimes allude to by quoting the poet:
"Do not wage war against my heart with your eyes, *** For two weak ones overcome a strong one."
They ignore this fact and say: Ibn Lahi'a is weak. Fine, a weak added to a weak does not equal severe weakness. No, it equals good. This is one point. The other is: they ignore that Sa'id ibn Bashir, who narrated the hadith with the break mentioned earlier, was supported by a trustworthy man. He narrated it from his teacher Qatadah, who said: The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said: [and he mentioned the hadith]. If we were to overlook the two previous hadiths mentioned and stop at the hadith of Qatadah as a mursal (missing the Companion link), we would say this is a mursal hadith with a valid chain. We have reached your question. Does this mursal hadith gain strength from other matters, including the hadith of Sa'id ibn Bashir which he narrated with a complete chain? Yes, we do not argue with it. Including the hadith of Ibn Lahi'a which he narrated with a complete chain from another route. Finally, there are other supporting factors: that the interpreter of the Qur'an, Abdullah ibn Abbas, acted upon it, indeed issued a fatwa based on it. And the most ascetic and most worshipful of the Companions, Abdullah ibn Umar ibn al-Khattab, both of them said that the face of a woman is not an awrah (part of the body that must be covered). They overlook all these issues, and the practice of the Muslims, which is the last word said: regarding the permissibility of uncovering, even from some Hanbali scholars, and at their head—and peace be upon you and Allah's mercy and blessings—Ibn Muflih the Hanbali, to whom Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy on him) gave a very great testimony, saying: "You are Muflih." He was asked about the face of a woman when she goes out in the road, is it permissible for her to go out uncovered? He mentioned the disagreement among Muslim scholars and said that it is permissible. I mentioned this in detail in the introduction to "The Jilbab of the Woman."
The questioner : How are you, my master?The Shaykh ؟
The Shaykh : Yes?
The questioner : How are you? Welcome. In the introduction to "The Jilbab of the Muslim Woman," my intention is with a hadith like this: if we stop only at the narration of Abu Dawud, it remains weak. But if we look at those corroborating narrations, and the fatwas of some of the great Companions, without any known opponent to them, and then the continuation of the practice of the Muslims, especially in Hajj, on this ruling, all of this strengthens the one who is certain of the truth of his saying (peace and blessings be upon him):. And it is amazing that Imam al-Shafi'i explicitly stated that if a mursal hadith comes with a complete chain from another route, even if it is weak, the mursal hadith rises to the level of evidence. This too they overlooked. The point I want to make is: the science of hadith cannot do without the science of fiqh, just as the science of fiqh cannot do without the science of hadith. Indeed, they are two brothers who cooperate.
The questioner : O Shaykh, may Allah reward you with good.
The Shaykh : And beware of that.
When a woman reaches the age of menstruation, it is not permissible for any of her to be seen except her face and her two hands.
إذا بلغت المرأة المحيض لم يصلح أن يُرى منها إلا وجهها وكفَّيهاThe questioner : Ibn Daryak.
The Shaykh : Yes, and between Iyya.
The questioner: Aisha.
The Shaykh : And between whom, the narrator of the hadith?
The questioner: Aisha.
The Shaykh : Aisha, and another defect, which is Sa'id ibn Bashir. They mention these two defects and proceed, so the hadith is weak. Then they ignore some scientific facts, some hadith-related and some precise fiqh-related matters connected to the fiqh mentioned earlier. The hadith-related aspect concerns two matters. The first aspect is that this hadith has a corroborating narration from the hadith of Asma bint Umayyad. It is true that the chain of this corroborating narration contains Abdullah ibn Lahi'a, who is known to be weak due to his poor memory, but this does not prevent the scholar from citing it as evidence. They ignore citing evidence like the hadith of Ibn Lahi'a and settle for saying: it is weak, and the matter is over. As for remembering that a weak narration added to a weak narration equals a strong one, this is the rule mentioned in terminology, which I sometimes allude to by quoting the poet:
"Do not wage war against my heart with your eyes, *** For two weak ones overcome a strong one."
They ignore this fact and say: Ibn Lahi'a is weak. Fine, a weak added to a weak does not equal severe weakness. No, it equals good. This is one point. The other is: they ignore that Sa'id ibn Bashir, who narrated the hadith with the break mentioned earlier, was supported by a trustworthy man. He narrated it from his teacher Qatadah, who said: The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said: [and he mentioned the hadith]. If we were to overlook the two previous hadiths mentioned and stop at the hadith of Qatadah as a mursal (missing the Companion link), we would say this is a mursal hadith with a valid chain. We have reached your question. Does this mursal hadith gain strength from other matters, including the hadith of Sa'id ibn Bashir which he narrated with a complete chain? Yes, we do not argue with it. Including the hadith of Ibn Lahi'a which he narrated with a complete chain from another route. Finally, there are other supporting factors: that the interpreter of the Qur'an, Abdullah ibn Abbas, acted upon it, indeed issued a fatwa based on it. And the most ascetic and most worshipful of the Companions, Abdullah ibn Umar ibn al-Khattab, both of them said that the face of a woman is not an awrah (part of the body that must be covered). They overlook all these issues, and the practice of the Muslims, which is the last word said: regarding the permissibility of uncovering, even from some Hanbali scholars, and at their head—and peace be upon you and Allah's mercy and blessings—Ibn Muflih the Hanbali, to whom Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy on him) gave a very great testimony, saying: "You are Muflih." He was asked about the face of a woman when she goes out in the road, is it permissible for her to go out uncovered? He mentioned the disagreement among Muslim scholars and said that it is permissible. I mentioned this in detail in the introduction to "The Jilbab of the Woman."
The questioner : How are you, my master?The Shaykh ؟
The Shaykh : Yes?
The questioner : How are you? Welcome. In the introduction to "The Jilbab of the Muslim Woman," my intention is with a hadith like this: if we stop only at the narration of Abu Dawud, it remains weak. But if we look at those corroborating narrations, and the fatwas of some of the great Companions, without any known opponent to them, and then the continuation of the practice of the Muslims, especially in Hajj, on this ruling, all of this strengthens the one who is certain of the truth of his saying (peace and blessings be upon him):
When a woman reaches the age of menstruation, it is not permissible for any of her to be seen except her face and her two hands.
إذا بلغت المرأة المحيض لم يصلح أن يُرى منها إلا وجهها وكفَّيهاThe questioner : O Shaykh, may Allah reward you with good.
The Shaykh : And beware of that.
Source
www.al-albany.com
The Arabic text is copied verbatim from the original source, without any edits.