The Authentic and the Weak in al-Tirmidhi
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
Question:
If al-Tirmidhi traces a hadith and says, "Its chain is not strong," and the hadith is in the chapter on the virtues of deeds, what is your opinion, Your Eminence?
Answer:
Al-Tirmidhi (may Allah have mercy on him) is generally reliable in his authentication and grading of hadiths as good, but he may weaken some hadiths that are strong according to others, yet whose chains are weak in his view. He may also grade some hadiths as good or authentic that are not so according to other masters of hadith. For example: the hadith of 'Amr ibn Shu'ayb from his father from his grandfather, regarding the woman who entered upon the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) with two bracelets of gold on her daughter's hand, and he (peace and blessings be upon him) said to her:. This hadith is in the chapter on zakah, and it is weak according to al-Tirmidhi; because it is narrated through al-Muthanna ibn al-Sabah from 'Amr ibn Shu'ayb, and al-Muthanna is weak—I mean al-Muthanna—and it is good according to Abu Dawud and al-Nasa'i; because it is narrated by some of the trustworthy narrators from 'Amr ibn Shu'ayb, and al-Hafiz ruled in *al-Bulugh* that its chain is strong.
So the point is: it is good according to Abu Dawud and al-Nasa'i, and al-Hafiz ruled in *al-Bulugh* that its chain is strong; so the point is that it is good according to Abu Dawud and al-Nasa'i, but it is weak according to al-Tirmidhi; because it is narrated by al-Muthanna ibn al-Sabah—as mentioned earlier—and he (may Allah have mercy on him) has other hadiths that he authenticated or graded as good, which are weak.
And the point of this is: his authentication or grading as good is not sufficient, rather it is necessary to review the chains and the words of the scholars regarding that, so that the student is on clear ground. Likewise, the narrations of Abu Dawud, al-Nasa'i, Ibn Majah, al-Darimi, and Imam Ahmad (may Allah have mercy on them all) include both weak and authentic hadiths.
So if Abu Dawud or al-Nasa'i or Ibn Majah or al-Darimi or others who did not commit to authenticity in what they narrate remain silent, then review the chains and their transmitters—if you have knowledge and understanding—otherwise review the words of the scholars; such as al-Hafiz in *al-Talkhis*, *Nasb al-Ra'yah* by al-Zayla'i, *Fath al-Bari*, and others.
And do not rush in authenticating or weakening until you have the qualification; because these are serious matters, unlike the two Sahihs, whose hadiths are accepted by the scholars. Abu Dawud (may Allah have mercy on him) explicitly stated that if he remains silent about something, it is valid for argumentation in his view. Al-Hafiz al-'Iraqi said about him (may Allah have mercy on him) in his *Alfiyyah*, and the text is:
And I do not mention a severe weakness
And where there is no weakness, I have traced it
Meaning that he mentions the one with severe weakness, and the one about which he remains silent is valid, but not absolutely; it may be weak according to others, even if it is valid in his view, as the scholars clarified; such as al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar and others.
If al-Tirmidhi traces a hadith and says, "Its chain is not strong," and the hadith is in the chapter on the virtues of deeds, what is your opinion, Your Eminence?
Answer:
Al-Tirmidhi (may Allah have mercy on him) is generally reliable in his authentication and grading of hadiths as good, but he may weaken some hadiths that are strong according to others, yet whose chains are weak in his view. He may also grade some hadiths as good or authentic that are not so according to other masters of hadith. For example: the hadith of 'Amr ibn Shu'ayb from his father from his grandfather, regarding the woman who entered upon the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) with two bracelets of gold on her daughter's hand, and he (peace and blessings be upon him) said to her:
Do you give the zakah of this?
أتعطين زكاة هذا؟So the point is: it is good according to Abu Dawud and al-Nasa'i, and al-Hafiz ruled in *al-Bulugh* that its chain is strong; so the point is that it is good according to Abu Dawud and al-Nasa'i, but it is weak according to al-Tirmidhi; because it is narrated by al-Muthanna ibn al-Sabah—as mentioned earlier—and he (may Allah have mercy on him) has other hadiths that he authenticated or graded as good, which are weak.
And the point of this is: his authentication or grading as good is not sufficient, rather it is necessary to review the chains and the words of the scholars regarding that, so that the student is on clear ground. Likewise, the narrations of Abu Dawud, al-Nasa'i, Ibn Majah, al-Darimi, and Imam Ahmad (may Allah have mercy on them all) include both weak and authentic hadiths.
So if Abu Dawud or al-Nasa'i or Ibn Majah or al-Darimi or others who did not commit to authenticity in what they narrate remain silent, then review the chains and their transmitters—if you have knowledge and understanding—otherwise review the words of the scholars; such as al-Hafiz in *al-Talkhis*, *Nasb al-Ra'yah* by al-Zayla'i, *Fath al-Bari*, and others.
And do not rush in authenticating or weakening until you have the qualification; because these are serious matters, unlike the two Sahihs, whose hadiths are accepted by the scholars. Abu Dawud (may Allah have mercy on him) explicitly stated that if he remains silent about something, it is valid for argumentation in his view. Al-Hafiz al-'Iraqi said about him (may Allah have mercy on him) in his *Alfiyyah*, and the text is:
And I do not mention a severe weakness
And where there is no weakness, I have traced it
Meaning that he mentions the one with severe weakness, and the one about which he remains silent is valid, but not absolutely; it may be weak according to others, even if it is valid in his view, as the scholars clarified; such as al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar and others.
Source
binbaz.org.sa
The Arabic text is copied verbatim from the original source, without any edits.