Mawḍū’ is that ḥadīth which has been made up, invented and forged by the narrator himself.
A mawḍū’ ḥadīth is known through:
- Self testimony
- That which is similar to a self testimony
- Through establishing links about the condition of the narrator[1]
- That which has been narrated[2]
Ibn Daqīq al-Īd says that the self testimony of a narrator, that he invented a narration, is sufficient to refute him. However it is not definitive that the narration is mawḍū’ as it is possible that he may have also lied about this confession. Imām Sakhāwī mentions that, its intended meaning is that it is not mawḍū’.
A possibly better opinion is that which has been mentioned by al-Hāfidh, that it is mawḍū’, however it is not definitive but rather most likely to be mawḍū’.
Ruling of narrating mawḍū’ aḥādīth
It is not permissible to narrate aḥādīth which are mawḍū’, unless it is to teach and clarify that this ḥadīth is mawḍū’.[3]
[1] For example, finding out that the date of death of the shaykh is before the date of birth of the student, and therefore it would have been impossible for them to have met, and thus the student did not narrate from the shaykh.
[2] Narrating that which is in contradiction to the clear wording of the Qur’ān, mutawātir aḥādīth, ijmā’, clear intellect or against physical sense which has been witnessed (Ḥiss al-Mushāhadah). Such as a narrator saying that Qiyamah is in 100 years, as this is against the Qur’ān and Sunnah.
[3] A question may arise; Many famous books such as Ihyā Ulūm al-Dīn, Tafsīr al-Rāzi, the books of Sūfiyyah and even the speech of scholars contain mawḍū’ aḥādīth, have they all done Harām by narrating these aḥādīth? The answer is, it possible that they did not know these aḥādīth aremawḍū’, thus one would be be sinful if they know it to be mawḍū’ and still narrate the ḥadīth.