—this is not so, for there are scholars who do not rely on a weak ḥadīth under any circumstance, whether for legal rulings or for devotional merits. Ibn Sayyid al-Nās reports this stance in ʿUyūn al-Athar on the authority of Yaḥyā ibn Maʿīn, and in Fatḥ al-Mughīb it is likewise attributed to Abū Bakr ibn al-ʿArabī.

Jalāl al-Dīn al-Qāsimī states in Qawāʿid al-Taḥdīth fī Muṣṭalaḥ al-Ḥadīth: “It seems that al-Bukhārī and Muslim held the same view. Al-Bukhārī’s stringent criteria in his Ṣaḥīḥ point to it, and Imām Muslim’s censure of those who transmit weak reports whose weakness is unanimously agreed upon, as we have already mentioned, supports it. This is also the position of Ibn Ḥazm—may Allah have mercy on him—as he declares in al-Milal wa-l-Niḥal (consult his words there) and again in al-Muḥallā. One may add here the conditions laid down by al-Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar in Tabiyān al-ʿAjab fīmā Wurida fī Faḍl Rajab.”

What I hold, and by which I seek closeness to Allah, is that the truth in this question lies with the scholars who refrain from acting on weak ḥadīths even in matters of virtuous deeds, for several reasons:

First: By unanimous agreement, a weak ḥadīth provides only conjecture, and acting on conjecture is not permissible. Allah says, “They follow nothing but conjecture, and indeed conjecture is of no avail against the truth” (Qur’an 53:28). The Prophet ﷺ likewise said, “Beware of conjecture, for conjecture is the most deceptive of speech.”

Second: The Prophet ﷺ instructed us to avoid attributing reports to him unless we are certain of their authenticity. He said, “Guard yourselves when reporting from me, except what you know to be sound.” It is obvious that narrating a ḥadīth is merely a means to acting on its contents; therefore, if he ﷺ forbade us to convey what is not verified from him, then, a fortiori, he forbade us to act upon it. This is manifest and clear.