The Sunnah is the second primary source of Islamic jurisprudence after the Quran. Both were revealed by Allah, but they differ in that the Qur’an is Allah’s literal speech, while the wording of the hadiths are by the Prophet (ṣ). Although, there is a type of hadiths referred to as Qudsi-hadiths. Their wording, according to the majority, is from Allah, although they differ to the Quran in that they do not pose the challenge of inimitably (iʿjāz), which is to produce something like the Quran. Additionally, one does not obtain reward by reading Qudsi-hadiths as one would obtain by reading each letter of the Quran.
Another major difference between them is that the Quran is unquestionably authentic as it has been transmitted by large amounts of narrators through each passing generation (mutawātir). Whereas hadiths may be mutawātir or aḥād, which is when the number of narrators in each generation are less than what would make it mutawātir. Further, aḥād hadiths can either be authentic or unauthentic.
From among unauthentic hadiths are weak hadiths, and they can be divided into two with regards to their weakness:
1. Slightly Weak: These are hadiths that do not contain any overly unreliable narrators in their chain nor anything questionable in their content (e.g., ḍaʿīf jiddan, munkar al-ḥadīth, ). Their narrators are generally trustworthy but plagued with a weak memory, and thus not reliable. Hadiths from such narrators are inauthentic in of themselves but can sometimes reach the lowest grade of authenticity due to some external factors (ḥasan li ghairihi), such as if supported by another hadith or chain of narration.
2. Very Weak: These are hadiths that have very weak narrators in their chain, such as one who is dishonest or extremely incompetent in preserving texts. Such hadiths cannot even reach the lowest level of authenticity even if supported due to the extremely low probability, if any, of truthfulness.
After that is made clear, one might ask: can weak hadiths be used as evidence in Islam? This requires some further information, such as the subject area that one is dealing with, as different subject areas have different standards for what constitutes as evidence. The following are subject areas divided according to their standard of accepting something as evidence or not:
- Islamic legal rulings (ḥalāl/ḥarām)
- Encouragement and Discouragement (al-Targhīb wa al-tarhīb).
- Excellent Acts (Faḍāʾil al-Aʿmāl).
- Campaigns and the Prophetic Biography (al-Siyar wa al-Maghāzī)
- Quranic Exegesis (al-Tafsīr)
- Events of the Last Days (al-Malāḥim) and others
First, it should be noted that there is a consensus that a hadith with extreme weakness can never be used as evidence, regardless of the subject area. In fact, such narrations can only be transmitted if their weakness is mentioned along with it.[1]
As for slightly weak hadiths, then there is a difference regarding their authority. There are three opinions regarding this:
- Slightly weak hadiths are authoritative regardless the subject area, with the condition that there is no authentic hadith in the respective subject area, nor anything that contradicts it. They cite the following to substantiate their view:
- There is a probability that it is still correct, albeit being grading inauthentic, if there is nothing that contradicts it.
- A weak hadith is better than a mere opinion.
This is attributed to the Imams of the four schools of thought (Madhāhib), Imām Abu Ḥanīfah (d. 150/767), Mālik (d. 179/795), al-Shāfiʿi (d. 204/820), and Aḥmad b. Ḥanbal (d. 241/855), as it is quite clear that they gave precedence, in certain matters, to weak hadiths over mere opinion or analogy.[2] ʿAbdurraḥmān b. Mahdi (d. 198/814) said his well-known statement, “When reports of the Prophet regarding what is permissible (ḥalāl) and forbidden (ḥarām) used to reach us, we used to critically examine their chains of narration and narrators. But, when we received reports regarding acts of excellence (Faḍāʾil al-Aʿmāl), their reward [in the Hereafter], permissible things, or righteous actions, we dealt with their chains of narration more easily.”[3]
- Slightly weak hadiths are unequivocally unacceptable. There arguments are as follows:
- The weakness exhibited in the Hadith is sufficient to cast doubt on the reliability of the narration. Even though there is a possibility that it is true, but it is scant to the amount that it is equal to assumption. Allah says regarding assumption, “Most of them follow nothing but ˹inherited˺ assumptions. ˹And˺ surely assumptions can in no way replace the truth.”[4]
- Authentic hadiths cover all topics, so there is no need for weak hadiths.
This opinion is held by several hadith scholars, including Ibn Maʿīn, al-Bukhāri, Muslim, Abu Zurʿah al-Rāzi, Abu Ḥātim al-Rāzi, Ibn Ḥazm, Ibn Taimiyyah, al-Shawkāni, and by contemporary hadith scholars such as Ahmad Shākir and Al-Albani.[5]
- Slightly weak hadiths are only authoritative in Faḍāʾil al-Aʿmāl and al-Targhīb wa al-Tarhīb, and not in Islamic jurisprudence (fiqh). According to al-Nawawi, this is the predominant view held by majority of hadith and fiqh He even goes on to claim a consensus on this opinion. They conclude:
- Since the subject areas of Faḍāʾil al-Aʿmāl and al-Targhīb wa al-Tarhīb are not as detrimental, there is no harm in following a slightly weak hadith in them, which could possibly be correct, so as not to let a possible reward slip by.
Since Fiqh (jurisprudence) is related to permissibility (ḥalāl) and impermissibility (ḥarām) and thus very detrimental, it is safer and wiser to avoid slightly weak hadiths in it due to the higher possibility of inauthenticity. For there is no harm in skipping over a possible permissible act, but dangerous to act upon a possible impermissible act.
The proponents of this opinion require certain conditions for the acceptability of such hadiths, such as:
- The content of the hadith must have a basis in Islam.
- The one who acts upon it does so without believing in the authenticity of the hadith as a precaution.
- It should not be a hadith of jurisprudence (ḥalāl or ḥarām).
- It must not contradict any authentic hadith.
- Its content must not be considered from the Sunnah.[6]
It is worth mentioning that Ibn Taimiyyah and his disciple Ibn al-Qayyim are of the opinion that hadith scholars of the first generation when mentioning slightly weak hadiths are referring to ḥasan hadiths and not actually weak hadiths. This is because the science of hadith terminology (muṣṭalaḥ al-ḥadith) was not developed at that time and hadiths were only categorized into two: 1. Ṣaḥīḥ (which is inclusive of the later term ḥasan), 2. Ḍaʿīf.[7] Even though the first opinion of the three is attributed to the Imams of the four schools of thought, it is quite questionable because there are no explicit statements from them in this regard.
An exception might be the view of Imām Aḥmad b. Ḥanbal, as he said, “A weak hadith is more loved to me than mere opinion.” However, Ibn Taimiyyah and Ibn al-Qayyim asserted that Imām Aḥmad’s intent is not what it seems, which, although is also not free from criticism. A possible proof that this statement is not their general stance is that in fiqh books scholars often weaken or nullify a specific opinion due to its reliance on a weak hadith. Thus, if a weak hadith was authoritative, there would be no problem in using it as evidence to affirm a specific opinion.
The third opinion was also challenged because the Shariah (Islamic Law) does not differentiate between subject areas with regards to evidence, as it requires authentic evidence for every matter. The second opinion is also held by many great hadith scholars, which nullifies Al-NawawI’s claim of a consensus on the third opinion. Further, Al-Sakhāwi and Al-Suyūṭi also confirm this difference of opinion in their respective works.[8]
Moreover, the conditions mentioned in the third opinion are very difficult to comply with. Therefore, the contemporary hadith scholar Al-Khuḍair is of the opinion that no real example, which meets these conditions, actually exists.[9] Most fail to comply with the first condition, which only allows the use of slightly weak hadiths. This is because only hadith scholars are competent in judging the authenticity of hadiths, and therefore one often finds that regular Muslims end up relying upon extremely weak hadiths in Faḍāʾil al-Aʿmāl or al-Targhīb wa al-Tarhīb. Additionally, the condition that stipulates that the doer of the action taken from the slightly weak hadith must not hold that action to be authentic for precaution is counterintuitive. This is because one should act out of conviction, and conviction must be based on valid evidence. Precaution in this matter would actually be to refrain from acting upon the slightly weak hadith until proven authentic.
The Prophet (s) said, ”Whoever reports from me something that seems like a lie, he is one of the liars.”[10] The well-known Andalusian scholar, Ibn al-ʿArabI (d. 543/1148), comments, “The scholars say that one must accept narrations only from reliable people and if one continues to transmit from unreliable people then one would have reported a hadith which seems like a lie.”[11]
After weighing the different opinions, preponderance would go to the second opinion, which is that weak hadiths do not constitute as evidence in Islam. There are lots of authentic narrations from the Prophet (ṣ) covering all areas of Islam. However, this does not mean that slightly weak hadiths must be discarded. Indeed, if two slightly weak hadiths support each other, they reach the lowest level of authenticity (ḥasan li ghairih) and thus can be used as evidence. In addition, some scholars use slightly weak hadiths in certain areas, such as but not limited to: preponderance (al-tarjīḥ), Quranic exegesis, or Islamic history. This is usually for specific reasons, such as filling a gap in a narrative.
[1] See al-Sakhāwi: al-Qawl al-Badīʿ, p. 258.
[2] See: al-Khuḍair: al-Ḥadīth al-Ḍaʿīf, pp. 250-258; Brown, Jonathan: Even if Itʼs Not True Itʼs true: Using Unreliable Ḥadīths in Sunni Islam (Brill, Islamic Law and Society 18 2011, 1-52), p. 5.
[3] Al-Ḥākim: al-Mustadrak, vol. 1, p. 490 f.
[4] Qur’an, 10:36.
[5] Al-Khuḍair: al-Ḥadīth al-Ḍaʿīf, pp. 260-270.
[6] Ibid, pp. 272 f.
[7] Ibn Taimiyyah: Minhāj al-Sunnah, vol. 2, p. 191.
[8] Al-Sakhāwi: Fatḥ al-Mughīth, vol. 1, p. 268; al-Suyūṭi: Tadrīb al-Rāwi, p. 196. See also Brown, p. 3.
[9] Al-Khuḍair: al-Ḥadīth al-ḍaʿīf, 296.
[10] Muslim: Muqaddima
[11] Ibn al-ʿArabi: ʿAriḍat al-aḥwaḏi, 10, p. 129.
