Explanation of the author's statement: And his saying (… and send blessings upon me, for your blessings reach you wherever you are) narrated by Abu Dawud with a good chain, and its narrators are trustworthy.

The Shaykh : He said: Send blessings upon me: This is a command. Send blessings upon me means: Say: O Allah, send blessings upon Muhammad; O Allah, send blessings upon Muhammad. And this is a command, and Allah has commanded this in His saying, the Exalted: .
The virtue of sending blessings upon the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) is well known. Among its virtues is: . And the sending of blessings from Allah upon His Messenger does not mean, as some scholars have said, that the sending of blessings from Allah is mercy. For this is not correct. Some scholars said: The sending of blessings from humans is supplication, from the angels is seeking forgiveness, and from Allah is mercy. This is not correct. Rather, the meaning of Allah’s sending of blessings upon a person is His praising him in the highest assembly, as Abu al-‘Aliyah said, and the precise scholars of knowledge followed him in this. And what indicates the invalidity of the first opinion is His saying, the Exalted: blessings and mercy, and the principle in conjunction is difference.
The student: ... .

The Shaykh : Hm?
The student: … that the sending of blessings from humans is supplication and from the angels is seeking forgiveness.

The Shaykh : No. The sending of blessings from humans means when they say: O Allah, send blessings upon Muhammad. Its meaning is that they ask Allah to praise him in the highest assembly, meaning they supplicate to Allah to praise him in the highest assembly. So when you say: O Allah, send blessings upon Muhammad, Allah praises you in the highest assembly. How many times? Ten times. A great blessing, a great blessing, that Allah praises you before His angels ten times when you send blessings upon His Prophet (may Allah’s blessings and peace be upon him). Yes.
He said: And his saying: . Where: Is it a circumstantial phrase or not? It is built on the damma in the position of the accusative. And it is said in it: hitha, hawth, and hath, but these are rare.
This : How does it reach him? How does it reach him?
We say: When such a text comes, and it is from the matters of the unseen, then it is obligatory for us to say: The how is unknown. Meaning, by what means does it reach him? We do not know. But it has been reported from the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) . If this is authentic, then this is the manner, this is the manner. And it may be said: That their sending of blessings upon him reaches him where he was, is what he finds (peace and blessings be upon him) from the acceptance of Allah the Exalted of this sending of blessings. Then this is undoubtedly an increase in the good deeds of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him); this is an increase in his good deeds. And it may also be said that this is part of the manner , meaning he is informed of it by the increase of his good deeds therein.
"Narrated by Abu Dawud with a good chain and its narrators are trustworthy", "Narrated by Abu Dawud with a good chain and its narrators are trustworthy". What is your opinion from the terminological perspective regarding this expression? Is there a contradiction between "good" and "trustworthy"?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh: No, in reality, the apparent meaning of the wording is that there is a difference between them. But we know that "good" (hasan) is that the narrator has slight precision; slight precision means that there is a degree of trustworthiness, there is a degree of trustworthiness. So it combines the statement of the author (may Allah have mercy on him) and what he mentioned regarding the narration of Abu Dawud with a good chain, that the meaning of "trustworthy" is not the ultimate degree of trustworthiness. Because if it reached the ultimate degree of trustworthiness, it would be authentic (sahih); because the trustworthiness of the narrator returns to the realization of the two descriptions in him, which are: justice and precision. So if the precision is slight, the trustworthiness in him is slight. Just as if the justice is slight, the trustworthiness in him is also slight. So it combines them by meaning: absolute trustworthiness, absolute trustworthy narrators. But there is no doubt in my view that if he follows his saying: "good" with "its narrators are trustworthy", it is higher than if he had limited himself to the word: "good". Yes, higher than if he had limited himself to the word "good." And like this is what Ibn Hajar expresses in "Taqrib al-Tahdhib", he says for example: "truthful, makes mistakes", and sometimes he says: "truthful". Which is stronger? "Truthful" is stronger; so the vindication of the man described as "truthful" is stronger than the vindication of the man who is described as "makes mistakes."
Let no one say: That the word "makes mistakes" does not increase his weakness; because there is no person who does not make mistakes.
We say: This is not correct; because their saying: they do not mean by it the mistake that no one is free from, and were it not that there is a prevalence of mistakes in his narrations, they would not have described him with it, they would not have described him with it.
The student: Shaykh.

The Shaykh : Yes.
The student: His saying: "Narrated by Abu Dawud".

The Shaykh : Yes.
The student: ... .

The Shaykh : No, the apparent is that it is with a good chain from the Shaykh … from the Shaykh.