The Hadiths that Shaykh al-Albani Reconsidered after Declaring Them Weak in al-Silsilah al-Ṣaḥīḥah (7)
Introduction and First Installment

Abu ʿUmar al-ʿUtaybi

Introduction

All praise is for Allah. We praise Him, seek His help and His forgiveness, and seek refuge in Allah from the evils within ourselves and from our misdeeds. Whomever Allah guides, no one can mislead, and whomever He allows to stray, no one can guide. I bear witness that there is no deity worthy of worship except Allah, alone without partner, and I bear witness that Muhammad is His servant and Messenger.

“O you who believe, fear Allah as He should be feared and do not die except in a state of submission to Him.”
“O mankind, fear your Lord who created you from a single soul, then created from it its mate, and from the two of them spread many men and women. Fear Allah, in whose name you ask one another, and fear the ties of kinship; for Allah is ever watchful over you.”
“O you who believe, fear Allah and speak words that are right; He will amend your deeds for you and forgive you your sins. Whoever obeys Allah and His Messenger has indeed achieved a tremendous triumph.”

To proceed:

The best speech is the speech of Allah, the best guidance is the guidance of Muhammad ﷺ, and the worst matters are newly‐invented ones; every innovation is a bidʿah, every bidʿah is misguidance, and every misguidance is in the Fire.

This study presents the hadiths that Shaykh al-Albani first judged weak but later authenticated.

The Shaykh’s retraction from weakening a hadith arises from several causes, among them:

1. Inadvertence and error, from which no human being is exempt. Shaykh al-Albani himself pointed this out in several places, such as his words in al-Ṣaḥīḥah (7/121): “The hadith cited in the heading slipped into Ḍaʿīf al-Jāmiʿ (7225) by mistake, whereas it rightfully belongs in Ṣaḥīḥ al-Jāmiʿ; let it be transferred there. I ask Allah’s forgiveness and repent to Him.”

   An error may also occur when the Shaykh’s eye shifts from one narrator’s entry to another or from one chain to a different one—as with the hadith, “O Allah, let me live poor…,” al-Irwāʾ (861), and similar cases.

   Sometimes the lapse is pure human oversight: a break in the chain, an unknown transmitter, a confusion of narrators, or an objectionable wording in the text (though this is rare, as in the hadith of “al-Muṭāhir”). The Shaykh might not notice it until later, or someone alerts him and he realises it—see Cause Six below.

2. A change in the Shaykh’s judgment about the narrator on whom the hadith hinges. An example is the narration of Darrāj Abū al-Samḥ: initially the Shaykh rejected his narrations outright, then revised his view and deemed them sound except when he narrates from Abū al-Haytham.

   Shaykh al-Albani, may Allah have mercy on him, said in al-Ṣaḥīḥah (3/1189): “…Darrāj is upright in hadith except in what he narrates from Abū al-Haytham, as stated by Abū Dāwud and followed by al-Ḥāfiẓ. This is the position that now brings peace to the heart, as I explained under the previous hadith (3350).”

   The same applies to Qutaybah ibn Saʿīd’s transmissions from Ibn Luhayʿah—see, for example, al-Ṣaḥīḥah (7/1367).

   Likewise, he later considered a narrator of unknown status reliable when several trustworthy transmitters narrate from him and he transmits nothing objectionable—see Ṣaḥīḥ al-Targhīb wa-l-Tarhīb (1/new introduction, pp. 3–8, complete Maʿārif edition).

3. A new assessment of the various chains and corroborating reports: he may later deem them sufficient to strengthen a hadith, contrary to his earlier view. Numerous examples will follow, Allah willing.

4. The Shaykh may not have had access to a given isnād and thus followed earlier scholars; when he later obtained those chains and routes, he authenticated or upgraded the hadith. Conversely, a hadith he once deemed sound or fair by following another scholar might prove weak once he examined its isnād and uncovered its defects, exposing the error of those who had graded it sound.

   For example, he said in al-Ṣaḥīḥah (7/1413): “This investigation reveals the shortcoming of al-Mundhiri when he said in al-Targhīb (2/25), ‘It was related by al-Ṭabarāni in al-Kabīr and by al-Bayhaqi, and in it is Ibn Luhayʿah,’ and likewise the statement of al-Haythami in al-Majmaʿ (3/110): ‘It was related by al-Ṭabarāni in al-Kabīr, and in it is Ibn Luhayʿah, concerning whom there is some discussion.’”