Fourth: those who fall just short of the third rank; they are normally described as “saduq,” “la ba’sa bihi,” or “laysa bihi ba’s.” Thus you can see that al-Dhahabi places anyone labeled “saduq” on the same level as someone called “jayyid al-hadith” or “hasan al-hadith.” Ibn Hajar’s assessment does not differ: whoever, in his view, belongs to the third rank transmits sound (sahih) reports beyond dispute, while anyone in the fourth rank automatically yields a fair (hasan) hadith. The hadith critic Ahmad Shakir states this explicitly in Al-Baʿith al-hathith, p. 118; lack of space prevents me from quoting him in full, so this brief reference must suffice. One wonders: was the Doctor aware of this fact but concealed it from his students, hoping to make the hadith—which actually refutes him and everyone who shares his view—appear weak? Or did the time he spent earning his doctorate simply not allow him to learn it? If you do not know … and if you do know …! Second: even if we granted that the isnad of the hadith is weak, its weakness is not severe; such a report is strengthened when it arrives through another chain or is supported by a corroborating narration, as is well-established in hadith methodology. The Doctor himself acknowledged this principle when discussing the hadith of Abu Musa, “ … permissibility for its females,” and in fact a corroborating report exists, namely the hadith of Thawban that will be cited below in