By weak hadith we mean the one that does not have any circumstantial evidences supporting it.
The scholars of Islam, past and present, have used such weak narrations in varying areas of Shari’ah.
Area # 1
Using a weak hadith in law (ahkaam)
This is the opinion of the great mujtahideen of the Ummah the likes of, Abu Hanifah, Malik, Abu Yusuf, Muhammad ibn Hasan, as-Sahfi’e, Ahmed, Awzaa’i and others. Many muhadditheen, the likes of Abu Dawud, Tirmithi, Nasa’i and Ibn Abi Haatim also adopted this view. However they stipulate two condition, one is that the weakness should not be severe and two there should not be any other sacred text on the issue.
(Atharul Hadith as-Shareef by Muhaddith Muhammad Awwamah p. 33-34)
So if there is a weak hadith on an issue and there is no other sacred text on the issue they will prefer it over analogy which is also one of the reliable evidences of Shari’ah.
There is no blame on them concerning this preference and consideration because when a law is related from the Legislator (صلى الله عليه وسلم) even though the chain of transmission maybe weak one should not leave it for something else. This is due to the fact that the law is his law and the opinion is his opinion and a weak narration is not definitely something that cannot be ascribed to him once it is not baseless or contradicting a principle that is stronger than it. That is because classifying a hadith as weak and authentic is an issue of ijtihad, therefore a careless senile person may be accurate at times and similarly a person of weak memory may correctly retain a hadith.
(See Muthnawni wal Battaar p.180)
Allamah Sakhawi says in “Fathul Mugheeth” (1.147) that Imam Bazdawi states:
“A (weak) hadith is definite at its source; the doubt only came due to the transmission, while analogy is fundamentally speculative in all its aspects. Therefore the speculation in analogy is primarily while in the (weak) hadith it is incidental.”
Hafiz Ibnul Qaiyyim al-Jawziyyah states in his usulul fiqh work “E’laamul Muwaq-qe’een” (1/27):
“The forth principle: Using mursal and weak hadith when there is no other text on the issue contradicting it. This is the one he (Imam Ahmed) prefers over analogy… So when he does not find on a particular topic a hadith that rejects it (the weak hadith) or a statement of a Sahabi that contradicts it or the consensus of the scholars against it, practising on it would be better than analogy according to him.
There is no Imam but that they agree with him on this principle in some way or the other because every one of them has preferred a weak hadith over analogy.
Abu Hanifah has preferred the hadith of qah-qa-hah (laughing audibly) in salah over analogy even though all the muhadditheen agree that it is weak. He has preferred the hadith of wudhu with nabeezit tamar over qiyas even though majority of the scholars of hadith consider it weak…
Imam as-Shafe’i has preferred the hadith that prohibits hunting at Wajj even though the hadith is weak. He also preferred the narration of permissibility of performing salah in Makkah at the prohibited times even though the hadith is weak and it contradicts analogy on all other cities…
As for Malik, then he prefers the loose hadith, the interrupted hadith, balaaghaat and the opinion of the Sahabi over analogy.”
On explaining what Imam Ahmed meant when he said that Imam Awzaa’i’s hadith is weak Allamah Zahabi states in “Siyar A’laamin Nubalaa” (7/114):
“What he meant was that Awzaa’i’s hadith is weak because he uses cut-off hadith and mursal hadith of the people of Shaam as evidence.”
Hafiz Abu Zarr al-Harawi narrates in his “Zammul Kalaam wa Ahlihi” (2/179) that the great hafiz and faqeeh Shareek ibn Abdillah an-Nakha’ee al-Qazi said:
“A hadith with some weakness is more beloved to me than their opinion.”
Hafiz Ibnus Salah states in his “Muqaddimah” (36-37) that Abu Abdillah ibn Mandah related that he heard Muhammad ibn Sa’ad al-Baawardi saying in Egypt:
“It was Abu Abdir Rahman al-Nasa’i’s method to include the hadith of all those transmitters who were not unanimously rejected.”
Ibn Mandah himself added:
“Abu Dawud as-Sijistaani as well adopts the same course, including hadith having weak chains if he does not find anything else on the topic, because in his view they were stronger than the opinions of men.”
The great Imam of the hadith sciences Ahmed ibn Saalih al-Misri said:
“A transmitter’s hadith are not abandoned until everyone agrees that they are to be abandoned.”
(See Ulumul Hadith by Ibnus Salaah p. 127)
The great hadith expert Imam Ibn Abi Haatim states concerning Makhlad ibn Khufaaf al-Ghifaari in his encyclopedia of asmaaur rijaal (transmitters) “al-Jarh wat Ta’deel” (4/347):
“My father (Imam Abu Haatim) was asked concerning him so he replied: ‘Only Abu Zib narrates from him and this chain cannot be used as evidence.’ He meant the hadith that Makhlad ibn Khufaaf narrates from U’rwah from A’ishah from the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم): ‘The produce is for the responsible one.’ However, I take this (hadith) because it is better than the opinions of men.”
The later day scholars that complied books on the hadith of law (Ahaadithul Ahkaam) have all included weak hadith along with sound and authentic ones. These include Abdul Haqq Ashbili (d. 581 AH) in “Ahkaamul Wustaa”, Dhiyaa al-Miqdasi (d. 643 AH) in “as-Sunan wal Ahkaam”, Ibn Taimiyyah al-Jadd (d. 652 AH) in “al-Muntaqaa”, Muhibbud Deen at-Tabri (d. 694 AH) in ”al-Ahkaamul Kubraa”, Ibn Daqeequl Eid (d. 703 AH) in “al-Ilmaam”, Ibn Shaddaad in “Dalaailul Ahkaam”, Ibn Abdil Haadi (d. 744 AH) in “al-Muharrar”, Ibn Mulaqqin (d. 804 AH) in “Tuhfatul Muhtaaj”, Ibn Hajr Asqalaani (d. 852 AH) in “Bulughul Maraam”, Hasan ibn Ahmed ar-Rubaa’i (d. 1276 AH) in “Fathul Gaffaar”, Nimawi (d. 1322 AH) in “Aathaarus Sunan” and Zafar Ahmed Thanvi (d. 1394 AH) in “E’laaus Sunan. May Allah have mercy on all of them.
Even those who claim to totally reject weak hadith, fail to uphold their principle and still have to use weak narrations as evidence in law. Here is a list of these scholars:
Ibn Hazm az-Zahiri (d. 456 AH) in “al-Muhallaa”, as-Shawkani (d. 1250 AH) in “Nailul Awtaar”, Siddique Hasan Bhopali (d. 1307 AH) in “ar-Rawdhatun Nadiyyah”, Ibn Baaz (d. 1420 AH) in his “al-Fataawaa”, Albani (d. 1420 AH) in “Silsilah Dhaeefah” and “Irwaa-ul Ghaleel”, Saiyyid Saabiq (d. 1420 AH) in “Fiqhus Sunnah”, and Ibnul Uthaimeen (d. 1421 AH) in “as-Sharh al-Mumti’”.
Some of them after admitting the hadith is weak use it as evidence, while others use weak narrations as evidence by classifying them sound or authentic.
Wallahu A’lam
