What is your opinion regarding Imam Malik's statement that the hadith (Do not fast on Saturday except for what is obligatory upon you) is weak?

The questioner : Some of the Shaykhs say about the hadith: Imam Malik said about it that it is weak.

The Shaykh : No, either you made a mistake or the Shaykh from whom you quoted made a mistake.

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : Either you made a mistake or the Shaykh from whom you quoted made a mistake, because what is reported from Malik is that he said: "A lie." And this is from the "Yam" and not from the "Yam" [unclear], heh heh, because the hadith came through many routes from Abdullah ibn Busr, who was the last of the Companions of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) to pass away, in Sham in our land.

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : It came through many routes that he said: to the end of the hadith, and I have mentioned this hadith more than once earlier. This hadith came from Abdullah ibn Busr through many faces, three of which are authentic in "Sunan Abu Dawud," in "Sunan al-Tirmidhi," in "Sahih Ibn Hibban," in "Sahih Ibn Khuzaymah," and in "Sahih al-Mustadrak." So how can it be valid for a scholar like Imam Malik to say about such a hadith, "A lie"? All that can be said about such a hadith is that it is weak, as you quoted from him, and either you are mistaken or the one who quoted it to you is mistaken. Ah, it is possible to say about such a hadith that it is weak, but "a lie"? For a hadith to be called a lie, it must contain a liar and a fabricator. How can that be when it is narrated through many routes from a man named Thawr ibn Yazid, from Khalid ibn Ma'dan, from Abdullah ibn Busr? This is, of course, new talk, it is not like that. Thawr ibn Yazid is a trustworthy narrator from the men of al-Bukhari. Khalid ibn Ma'dan is a trustworthy narrator from the men of the six, meaning from the men of the two Shaykhs and the four Sunans. Abdullah ibn Busr is a noble Companion, as we told you earlier, that he was the last to die of the Companions of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) in Sham. And I am with you now; it is not hidden from you that the land of Sham is not just Syria. We are with you, we are still in the land of Sham, are we not, O Hamad?

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : Yes.

The questioner : Perhaps, I mean.

The Shaykh : Be patient, be patient. The one who mentioned that Malik said the hadith is a lie is Abu Dawud. Abu Dawud in the Sunan. And people, in the Syrian expression, "put your hands on your hips and walk." Malik's statement: "The hadith is a lie" found favor in the hearts of people, so they transmit it without verifying whether this is authentic from Malik or reported from Malik with a sound chain. This is what I was in the process of explaining when I said that Abu Dawud is the one who mentioned that Malik said the hadith is a lie, and he did not support it with a sound chain to him, but rather said: "Malik said." Then this statement from Malik is transmitted in some copies of Sunan Abu Dawud, in some copies, and not in all copies. But the important thing is that the copy that mentioned this statement from Malik did not mention it with a chain from Abu Dawud to Malik. So this word has no value.

The questioner : Allah is the Greatest.

The Shaykh : Then it seems Abu Dawud is narrating this story and then refuting it, but in a very soft style, so soft that only the special people of knowledge barely notice it. How is that? Because after he narrated the hadith with a sound chain, Abu Dawud said: "A hadith that has been abrogated." If the hadith were a lie as Malik said, would Abu Dawud say "a hadith that has been abrogated"? At that point, it would be said, this is a dead matter that does not deserve this condolence. A hadith is called a lie, and it is said to be abrogated? It is not said about a hadith that it is abrogated unless its authenticity has been established. So Abu Dawud is refuting what he narrated from Malik regarding the declaration of the hadith as a lie. Therefore, this twisting and clinging to the word that Abu Dawud mentioned from Malik indicates only one of two things, and they may coincide: ignorance or desire. And they may coincide now. If you have a word, please.

The questioner : I was going to ask, I noticed. May Allah reward you with good for Malik, meaning it is reported from him. May Allah bless you.

The Shaykh : Oh God.

The questioner : Shaykh, some questions have arrived from a brother from Egypt. The brother sends you his greetings and says that only the honorable Shaykh Nasir should answer these questions. It is requested that the honorable Shaykh Al-Albani answer these questions himself, and that they be clearly explained on a tape. May Allah reward you with good, and may Allah reward our Shaykh with the best reward.

The Shaykh : ... The tooth is gone, the lesson is gone.