and weak. No one before him is known to have used this classification. Rather, they used to divide hadiths into authentic and weak, just as they divided narrators into weak and not weak. In their terminology, weak hadiths were of two kinds: those that could not be used as evidence, corresponding to “weak” in al-Tirmidhī’s terminology; and those that could be used as evidence, corresponding to “good” in his terminology.

Similarly, in the terminology of jurists, weakness caused by illness is of two kinds. One restricts a person’s gratuitous dispositions to one-third of his estate, as when he becomes bedridden. The other allows his gratuitous dispositions to be charged against the estate as a whole, as in a minor illness that does not incapacitate him. Hence, statements by Ahmad and other jurists indicate that they used weak hadiths as evidence, such as the reports of ʿAmr ibn Shuʿayb, Ibrāhīm al-Hajarī, and others. What those scholars called weak is superior to many reports classified as good; indeed, many scholars classify it as authentic. Al-Tirmidhī explained that by “good” he meant a hadith transmitted through multiple routes, with no narrator accused of lying, and which is not anomalous.

Section

The meaning conveyed by this hadith is a great foundation of the religion—indeed, it is the foundation of every deed. Hence, scholars said, “Islam revolves around three hadiths,” and included this hadith among them. Ahmad, for example, cited the hadiths:

“Actions are judged only by intentions,”

and:

“Whoever performs an act that is not in accordance with our teaching will have it rejected,”

and:

“The lawful is clear, and the unlawful