Al-Albani’s Critique of Sayyid Sabiq’s Use of Weak Hadiths in Fiqh Al-Sunnah
Mohamad Ehsan Bin Sebri1*, Roshimah Binti Shamsudin2
Department of Islamic Studies, School of Humanities, Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM)
*Corresponding Author
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.92900003
Received: 24 November 2025; Accepted: 30 November 2025; Published: 17 December 2025
This study examines Shaykh Nasir al-Din al-Albāni’s critique of the use of weak hadiths (hadith daif) in Sayyid Sabiq’s renowned work Fiqh al-Sunnah. Al-Albāni identified several weaknesses, including citing weak hadiths without evaluation, using hadiths with no traceable origin in major Sunnah sources, and incorrectly attributing certain hadiths to al-Sahihain (al-Bukhari and Muslim). Therefore, this research aims to assess the accuracy of al-Albāni’s criticism by analysing six selected hadiths discussed in the chapters on purification (taharah) and etiquettes of relieving oneself (adab qada’ al-hajah).This qualitative study adopts inductive, deductive, and critical analytical methods focused on sanad (chain of transmission) and matan (textual content) analysis, including takhrij (hadith verification) and iʿtibar (cross-verification of supporting chains). The findings show that some of the hadiths criticised by al-Albāni are indeed weak and cannot be used as evidence in legal rulings, while others, though weak in isolation, have supporting reports (syawahid or mutabaʿah) that elevate them to the level of hasan li ghayrih (sound due to corroboration). The study also finds that Sayyid Sabiq did not explicitly explain his methodological principles regarding the use of weak hadiths, which led to possible misunderstandings in his legal reasoning. Consequently, this study recommends that scholarly use of hadith in legal arguments must be accompanied by critical evaluation of both sanad and matan to ensure accuracy and reliability in conveying Islamic rulings.
Keywords: Weak hadith (daif), Sayyid Sabiq, Fiqh al-Sunnah, al-Albāni’s critique, Takhrij hadith
Sayyid Sabiq is among the most prominent contemporary Muslim jurists, widely known for his monumental work Fiqh al-Sunnah. This book gained immense popularity and has been used as a reference in Islamic educational institutions as well as among the general public. It is highly valued for its systematic presentation of fiqh rulings supported by evidence from the Qur’an and Sunnah.
However, the work has also received scholarly criticism, most notably from the contemporary hadith scholar
Shaykh Nasir al-Din al-Albāni, who highlighted several methodological shortcomings in Sabiq’s use of weak hadiths. Al-Albāni (2008) argued that Sabiq cited certain hadiths without verifying their status, used narrations that are not found in authentic hadith collections, and attributed some hadiths to Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim incorrectly.
This critique raises an important question about Sayyid Sabiq’s methodology in accepting and employing weak hadiths in his legal reasoning. While previous studies have examined the takhrij (source tracing) of hadiths in Fiqh al-Sunnah (Fransiska, 2015; Nadhirah, 2015), there has not been a comprehensive study assessing the reliability and methodology behind Sabiq’s use of weak hadiths.
Thus, this study aims to analyse al-Albāni’s critique by re-examining the hadiths he considered weak through takhrij, sanad analysis, and iʿtibar, in order to determine whether these hadiths are indeed unacceptable as evidence or whether they can still be considered valid due to corroborating narrations. This approach aims to provide a balanced and scholarly reassessment of Sayyid Sabiq’s effort to construct an accessible and evidencebased Islamic jurisprudence.
This study adopts a qualitative textual analysis approach within the fields of hadith and Islamic jurisprudence.
The main objective is to assess the validity of al-Albāni’s critique regarding the use of weak hadiths in Fiqh alSunnah by Sayyid Sabiq. The methodology comprises:
1. Data collection through library research of primary sources, including Fiqh al-Sunnah, Tamām alMinnah, and major hadith collections.
2. Inductive and deductive analysis to identify reasoning patterns in both scholars’ approaches.
3. Hadith verification (takhrij) and sanad evaluation — examining possible discontinuities (inqitāʿ), concealments (tadlīs), and textual irregularities (idtirāb).
4. Cross-verification (al-iʿtibar) and mutābaʿah analysis to evaluate whether a weak hadith can be elevated to hasan li ghayrih through supporting chains.
The findings are divided into three categories based on al-Albāni’s critique and the present re-evaluation:
1. Weak hadiths that cannot be used as evidence
o Examples: The hadith on the leftover water of wild animals, and the prohibition of talking while relieving oneself.
o These narrations have weak chains involving transmitters who are majhūl (unknown), matrūk (abandoned), or affected by tadlīs (concealment). Scholars such as al-Shāfiʿi, al-Nawawī, and al-Dāraqutnī also classified them as weak. The syawahid (corroborating chains) are insufficient to strengthen them.
o Implication: Such hadiths should not serve as legal proof in taharah (purity) matters. AlAlbāni’s criticism is valid in these cases.
2. Weak hadiths that can be upgraded to hasan li ghayrih
o Example: The hadith prohibiting urinating in holes or bathing places.
o Additional mutābaʿah and syawahid are found; al-Ḥākim traced a supplementary chain, and the concealment (tadlīs) by Qatādah is compensated by corroborating reports.
o Implication: Such hadiths can be accepted as supporting evidence; hence, al-Albāni’s critique is not absolute.
3. Authentic hadiths that were wrongly criticised
o Example: The hadith on not urinating while standing (narrated by ʿĀ’ishah).
o Although the chain includes a weak narrator, Shārik ibn ʿAbdullāh, the report is supported by other chains (e.g., Musnad Ibn Rahuyah), and the overall meaning remains reliable.
o Implication: The hadith remains valid due to corroboration; critical assessment should balance jarḥ wa taʿdīl (criticism and validation).
4. Lack of explicit methodology in Fiqh al-Sunnah
o Sayyid Sabiq did not state his principles for accepting or rejecting weak hadiths. This absence leads to ambiguity in his legal argumentation and interpretive approach.
o Implication: Contemporary fiqh writings should explicitly outline hadith evaluation methodology (takhrij and dirayah) to ensure academic precision.
Table 1. Summary of Key Findings
|
Category |
Example Issue |
Status & Justification |
Implication |
|
Weak hadiths – invalid as proof |
Leftover water of wild animals; prohibition of talking during defecation |
Weak chains (unknown or unreliable narrators); confirmed by classical critics such as al- Shāfiʿi and al-Dāraqutnī |
Cannot be used for legal rulings; supports al-Albāni’s strict approach |
|
Weak hadiths – strengthened by corroboration |
Prohibition of urinating in holes or bath areas |
Supported by mutābaʿah and syawahid; additional chains cited by al-Ḥākim |
Can be accepted as supportive evidence; al-Albāni’s criticism not absolute |
|
Authentic hadiths misjudged |
Prohibition of urinating while standing (ʿĀ’ishah’s narration) |
Shārik’s weakness compensated by parallel reports; validated by Ibn Rahuyah |
Remains reliable through corroboration; requires holistic evaluation |
|
Absence of clear methodology |
Lack of explicit principles in Fiqh al-Sunnah |
No stated framework for weak hadith usage |
Necessitates transparent hadith evaluation in modern fiqh scholarship |
Al-Albāni’s critique of Fiqh al-Sunnah is valid in several aspects, especially when weak hadiths lack corroborating support or when stronger narrations exist. Nevertheless, some of the hadiths he criticised can indeed be elevated to hasan li ghayrih through iʿtibar and mutābaʿah.
This study underscores the importance of clearly articulating hadith evaluation methodologies in fiqh writings. Incorporating both takhrij and dirayah disciplines is crucial to ensure that legal derivations are based on authentic evidence and scholarly precision.
All praise is due to Allah SWT. The authors extend sincere appreciation to Associate Professor Dr. Roshimah Binti Shamsudin for her continuous guidance and support, and to fellow researchers at Universiti Sains Malaysia for their academic and moral encouragement.
1. Abdullah bin ‘Adi al-Jurjani. (1984). Al-Kamil fi al-Dhua’fa al-Rijal. Beirut: Dar al-Fikr.
2. Abu Dawud. (2009). Sunan Abu Dawud. Beirut: Dar al-Risalah al-A‘lamiah.
3. Al-Albani, Muhammad Nasir al-Din. (2008). Tamām al-Minnah fī Ta‘līq Fiqh al-Sunnah. Amman: Dar Rayah.
4. Al-Baihaqi. (1991). Ma‘rifah al-Sunan wa al-Athār. Halab: Dar al-Wa‘i.
5. Al-Baihaqi. (1994). Sunan al-Baihāqi al-Kubra. Makkah: Maktabah Dar al-Baz.
6. Al-Baihaqi. (2003). Sunan al-Kubra. Beirut: Dar Kutub ‘Ilmiyyah.
7. Al-Daraqutni. (2001). Sunan al-Daraqutni. Beirut: Dar al-Ma‘arif.
8. Al-Dhahabi. (1982). Siyar Aʿlām al-Nubalā’. Beirut: Mu’assasah al-Risālah.
9. Al-Dhahabi. (1986). Zakara Asma’ man Tukullima fīhi wa Huwa Mauththiq. ‘Urdun: Maktabah al-Manar.
10. Al-Dhahabi. (2009). al-Mughni fi al-Dhua’fa’. Qatar: Idarah Ihya’ al-Turath.
11. Al-Dhahabi. (2009). Mīzān al-Iʿtidāl fī Naqd al-Rijāl. Beirut: Dār al-Maʿrifah.
12. Al-Mizzi. (1980). Tahdhīb al-Kamāl. Beirut: Mu’assasah al-Risalah.
13. Al-Nasa’i. (2001). Sunan al-Kubra. Beirut: Mu’assasah al-Risalah.
14. Al-Nasa’i. (2012). Sunan al-Nasa’i. Halab: Maktabah al-Matbuʿah al-Islamiyyah.
15. Al-Qāri, ‘Ali ibn ‘Ali. (2001). Sharh al-Shamā’il al-Muhammadiyyah. Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyyah.
16. Dane, F. C. (1990). Research methods. Thomson Brooks/Cole Publishing Co.
17. Erofina, Fransiska Gulit. (2015). Takhrij dan Dirasah al-Asanid Hadis-Hadis Thawaf dan Sa‘i dalam Fiqh al-Sunnah karya Sayyid Sabiq. IIQ, Jakarta.
18. Ibn Abi Syaibah. (2000). Musannaf Abi Syaibah. Kaherah: al-Faruq al-Hadith li al-Tiba‘ah wa al-Nasr.
19. Ibn Hajar. (1327H). Tahdhīb al-Tahdhīb. Beirut: al-Maʿarif.
20. Ibn Hajar. (1421H). Taqrīb al-Tahdhīb. Riyadh: Dar al-Aʿṣimah.
21. Ibn Jarrud. (2010). al-Muntaqā. Beirut: Dar Ibn Jauzi.
22. Ibn Mulaqqin. (1406H). Tuhfah al-Muhtāj ilā Adillah al-Minhāj. Makkah: Dar al-Hirā’.
23. Ibn Mulaqqin. (1410H). Khulāsah al-Badr al-Munīr fī Takhrīj Kitāb al-Sharh al-Kabīr li al-Rāfiʿī. Riyadh: Maktabah al-Rushd.
24. Ishaq Ibn Rahuyah. (2016). Musnad Ibn Rahuyah. Kaherah: Dar al-Taksil.
25. Muhammad Idris al-Shafi‘i. (2009). Musnad al-Shāfiʿī. Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyyah.
26. Nadhiroh, Wardatun. (2015). Hadis dalam Kitab Fiqh Kontemporer (kajian atas Fiqh al-Sunnah karya al-Sayyid Sabiq). Banjar Masin: IAIN.
27. Sabiq, Sayyid. (1997). Fiqh al-Sunnah. Beirut: Dar al-Kitab al-‘Arabi.
28. Abd al-Rahman Muqbil. (2013). Pandangan terhadap kitab Fiqh al-Sunnah karya Sayyid Sābiq. Safahat al-Syeikh Abd al-Rahman Muqbil. https://www.muqbel.net/fatwa.php?fatwa_id=3614