Clarification of the issue of strengthening a hadith through the aggregation of its chains, along with a discussion on the science of authenticating and weakening Prophetic hadiths.

The Shaykh : My brother, you must know that the science of hadith, specifically the science of authenticating and weakening, is not an easy science that every novice in this field can grasp. If a hadith is weakened, that weakening is based on looking at a single chain. However, if its chains are aggregated, it becomes clear to the researcher that this hadith should not be weakened simply because it was transmitted through one weak chain. It is well known to everyone the statement of the hadith scholars that a hadith is strengthened by the multiplicity of its chains. This is generally accepted. However, the issue and the danger lie in verifying this matter or this rule. We will not go far; Al-Hafiz Ibn al-Salah (may Allah have mercy on him), in his "Introduction," when he addressed this rule, gave an example of a weak hadith that is not established by the multiplicity of its chains. He gave as an example the famous hadith found in some of the Sunan: . He indicated (may Allah have mercy on him) that the chain of this hadith is weak in the Sunan, specifically "Sunan Abu Dawud." He also indicated that its chain is not a strange, isolated one, but rather it has other chains. However, in his opinion and independent legal reasoning, these chains do not suffice to strengthen this hadith. In reality, I traced the chains of this hadith, I believe, in the first volume of "Al-Silsilah al-Sahihah," and I found a valid chain for it in "Al-Mu'jam al-Kabir" by al-Tabarani. Here we reach a conclusion: that a hadith being weak because its chain is weak, or being good or authentic according to some because they traced its chains, is a relative matter. Therefore, a student of knowledge should not be confused by the disagreement of the early hadith scholars, let alone those engaged with hadith today, where one says this is good and another says it is weak. This is because this matter has causes that necessitate disagreement more than the causes that necessitate disagreement among jurists regarding legal rulings. A single ruling may be based on a single text from the Book or the Sunnah, and yet opinions and independent legal reasonings differ. However, disagreement in authenticating or weakening a hadith is much more complex than that juristic disagreement, because it returns to what I mentioned earlier: some stop at criticizing the hadith based on a single chain and weaken the hadith, while another looks at other chains for this hadith and rules on the basis of their aggregate that the hadith is good.
And I told you, I believe, recently, that the hadith scholars have explicitly stated in their terminology that if a student of knowledge sees a hadith with a weak chain, it is not correct for him to say, "This is a weak hadith." Rather, he should express the reality by saying, "Its chain is weak." This is part of their precision in their criticism and terminology, because there is a very clear difference between saying, "This is a weak hadith," because he is giving a ruling on the hadith, and saying, "Its chain is weak," because he is limiting his ruling to the chain. This ruling does not contradict the statement of one who might say, "The chain of this hadith is good," or "The chain of this hadith is authentic," because it does not refer to the chain that the first person weakened. And a fortiori, if he says, "This is a good hadith" or "This is an authentic hadith," it does not contradict the statement of one who said, "Its chain is weak," because it means that it is good or authentic by the aggregate of its chains.
Once this detail is known, the student of knowledge must then remember the following reality: not everyone who has grown up in this science should be relied upon for their research. It is sufficient that he is a novice and is walking on this path from its beginning. Therefore, students' minds should not be confused simply because a person appears with some research on a hadith and some researchers say, "He weakened this hadith." The least that can be said about the matter is: why did he weaken it? The matter at that point requires delving into research that the setting, place, and people may not be able to bear.Those present : However, if there is a scholarly session that is research-oriented and critical, then these chains are presented, and it is asked: Do these chains, in their aggregate, not give the hadith strength? If he says they do not give it strength, then a precise scholarly discussion takes place that many people may not be able to bear. But for it to be said in a brief session where the research is limited to quick answers, a person should not doubt a hadith that a well-known person, with a long history of practicing this science, has graded as good, simply because a researcher disagreed with him in his opinion, detail, or authentication. This is what can be said in this regard.