Is finding some weak hadiths in al-Dhahabi's abridgment of al-Mustadrak evidence that he did not follow up the hadiths of al-Mustadrak carefully, or that he abridged them?

The questioner : It is well known that al-Dhahabi commented on some of the hadiths in al-Mustadrak, and we find some scholars from after al-Dhahabi to our day saying the opposite of what he said, and he said: "And they agree with him in some of what he said." Is this evidence that al-Dhahabi (may Allah have mercy on him) did not follow up the hadiths of al-Mustadrak with a careful follow-up that is accepted for him, or that he intended abridgment and lack of precision?

The Shaykh : What we see, and Allah knows best, is that the matter is possible for this and for that; that is, it is possible that it was merely abridgment on his part, and in that case, he is not held accountable for what al-Hakim may have erred in, and he abridged his words, so he thought he agreed with him. This is possible. And what is possible, and what we follow in accordance with many of those who came before us from after al-Dhahabi, naturally, is that al-Dhahabi, given that he is known as an imam, a memorizer, and a critic, cannot remain silent about what he abridged if it became clear to him that there was an error in what he abridged. Because we find him saying in many of the hadiths: "I say: Rather, it is fabricated, or it is nearly fabricated, or so-and-so in it is weak, or unknown, etc." So his abridgment of al-Mustadrak was not a mere abridgment devoid of criticism, but it is accompanied by much criticism, as is observed in hundreds of hadiths. In that case, we have no choice but to say, as we do in many of our follow-ups to him, "Al-Hakim said: Authentic according to the conditions of al-Bukhari, or according to the conditions of Muslim, and al-Dhahabi agreed with him because he abridged al-Hakim's words and said: Khaf-Mim, or Khaf, or Mim. This is abridgment without doubt. But sometimes he criticizes him. So we say: We agreed with him, or we cleared him, or we criticized him by saying so-and-so. And therefore, it is not abridgment in the sense that comes to mind, that he does not bear responsibility for what he abridged. No, because reality testifies that he followed up on it in many cases, to the extent that he sometimes speaks very harshly about al-Hakim: "Where is his mind? And where is so-and-so?" until he speaks such words. So I think, and Allah knows best, that al-Hafiz al-Dhahabi, when he abridged al-Mustadrak, was not at the level of maturity known to us in his knowledge and his criticism. And this is the case of every individual among the scholars who progresses in the advancement of knowledge. It is the sunnah of Allah in His creation, and you will not find a change in the sunnah of Allah. So whether it is al-Hafiz al-Dhahabi, or al-Hafiz al-'Asqalani, or any other memorizer, it is not possible for him to be in the beginning of his seeking of knowledge as he is before his death, carrying this knowledge. They are not equal at all. Therefore, if we see one of these memorizers making many errors in some of his books, the interpretation of that, and it must be said, is that he authored it in the beginning of his seeking of knowledge. And the examples of this are numerous. For example, the book al-Ruh by Ibn al-Qayyim contains astonishing stories, indeed myths, which we exonerate Imam Ibn al-Qayyim al-Jawziyyah from, but they are present in this book to the extent that some researchers question whether the attribution of this book to Ibn al-Qayyim al-Jawziyyah is correct. I truly do not have a study as an answer to this question, but I do not rule out that Ibn al-Qayyim al-Jawziyyah authored this book in the beginning of his seeking of knowledge. And therefore, we see from him sometimes Sufism, because he grew up in that environment in which his Shaykh, Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah, excelled and was fought by the masses of sects and scholars because he was a nation alone in that time. So it is not strange that Ibn al-Qayyim al-Jawziyyah has this book, and that the interpretation of that is that he authored it in the beginning of his seeking of knowledge. This is what we say regarding the abridgment of al-Mustadrak by al-Hafiz al-Dhahabi. And now, excuse me, for the time indicates, and the indication of the state is more eloquent than the indication of speech, that it is eleven and a quarter. And Glory is to You, O Allah, and praise, I bear witness that there is no god but You, I seek Your forgiveness and I repent to You.The Shaykh : It is on the condition of al-Bukhari, on the condition of Muslim, and al-Dhahabi agreed with him because he abridged the words of al-Hakim. He said, "Kha-Mim, or Kha, or Mim." This is undoubtedly an abridgment, but sometimes he criticizes it. So we say, did he agree with him, or did he clear his name, or did he criticize him by saying such and such? Therefore, it is not an abridgment in the sense that comes to mind, where one does not bear responsibility for what he abridged. No, because reality testifies that he followed it up in many cases, to the extent that he sometimes speaks very harshly about al-Hakim, asking, "Where is his mind?" and "Where is such and such?" until he speaks in such terms. I think, and Allah knows best, that when al-Hafiz al-Dhahabi abridged al-Mustadrak, he was not at the level of maturity we know him for in his knowledge and criticism. This is the case with every individual among the scholars of knowledge; they progress in their elevation in knowledge. This is the law of Allah in His creation, and you will not find any change in the law of Allah. Whether it is al-Hafiz al-Dhahabi, al-Hafiz al-'Asqalani, or any other Hafiz, it is impossible for him to be in the beginning of his pursuit of knowledge as he was before his death, carrying this knowledge. They are not at all equal. Therefore, if we see one of these Hafizin making many errors in some of his books, the interpretation of that—and it must be said—is that he authored it in the beginning of his pursuit of knowledge. The examples of this are numerous. For instance, the book al-Ruh by Ibn al-Qayyim contains astonishing stories, indeed myths, which we purify Imam Ibn al-Qayyim al-Jawziyyah from, but they exist in this book to the extent that some researchers question whether the attribution of this book to Ibn al-Qayyim al-Jawziyyah is correct. I truly do not have a study as an answer to this question, but I do not rule out that Ibn al-Qayyim al-Jawziyyah authored this book in the beginning of his pursuit of knowledge. Therefore, we sometimes see Sufism in it, because he grew up in that environment in which his Shaykh, Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah, excelled and was fought by the masses of sects and scholars because he was a nation alone in that time. So it is not strange that Ibn al-Qayyim al-Jawziyyah has this book, and that the interpretation of that is that he authored it in the beginning of his pursuit of knowledge. This is what we say regarding the abridgment of al-Mustadrak by al-Hafiz al-Dhahabi. And now, excuse me, for the time indicates by its state, and the state of things is more eloquent than the tongue of speech: it is eleven and a quarter. Glory be to You, O Allah, and with Your praise, I testify that there is no deity but You, I seek Your forgiveness and I repent to You.
Abu Layla : And perhaps it will be an opportunity for our brother 'Isa to ask, preserving the questions of this...The Shaykh : He has no objection, and I have no objection like him.

The Shaykh : You leave it?
Abu Layla : I leave it, I leave it.

The questioner : Regarding Ibn al-Qayyim al-Jawziyyah, he explicitly states in the book Miftah Dar al-Sa'adah that the book is his, the book al-Ruh.

Another questioner : He explicitly states this?

The Shaykh : Does he state this explicitly?

Another questioner : ... .

The Shaykh : May Allah reward you with good.

Another questioner : And you...

The Shaykh : And Glory is to You, O Allah, and praise, I bear witness that there is no god but You, I seek Your forgiveness and I repent to You.