to say that the books of faḍāʾil are filled with fabrication without actually going through them is dishonesty because Mawlānā Zakariyyā al Kandahlawī added takhrīj for every single ḥadīth that he placed in those books.
https://twitter.com/abdulahadforu/status/1329032785139552256
there’s no denying that yes, some of the ḥadīths in them might be considered by a ḥadīth scholar as mawḍūʿ, but it is possible that it is considered as ḍaʿīf or even ḥasan by another due to the differences in their methodology.
ḥadīths can have varying gradings, and that’s true for every one of them; even those in Ṣaḥīḥ al Bukhārī where Imām al Dāraquṭnī did criticise some of them (though his arguments are considered weak).
and we need to put in mind as well that ḍaʿīf ≠ mawḍūʿ.
and we need to put in mind as well that ḍaʿīf ≠ mawḍūʿ.
“If reports are related to us from the Prophet concerning rulings and what is licit and prohibited, we are severe with the isnāds and we criticize the transmitters. But if we are told reports dealing with the virtues of actions (faḍāʾil al aʿmāl ),...
...their rewards and punishments [in the Afterlife], permissible things or pious invocations, we are lax with the isnāds.”
— ʿAbd al Raḥmān b. Mahdī raḥimahuLlāh, the teacher of Imām Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal raḍiya Allāhu ʿanh
— ʿAbd al Raḥmān b. Mahdī raḥimahuLlāh, the teacher of Imām Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal raḍiya Allāhu ʿanh
Imām Taqīy al Dīn ibn al Ṣalāḥ in his Muqaddimah, Imām Abū Zakariyyā al Nawawī in al Adhkār, Imām al Dhahabī in Siyar on the permissibility of using ḍaʿīf ḥadīths.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
