Firstly, I don't think any ḥadīth scholar worth their salt would try to say this ḥadīth (just looking at the ḥadīth itself) has been reliably transmitted. In fact, the scholars of ḥadīth, including Abū Dāwūd, the main transmitter of this report, generally agree that this narration is not authentic, since the narrator from ʿĀʾisha, Khālid b. Drake, never actually met her. But secondly, there's a difference been acknowledging (or being aware, rather) that a ḥadīth is unsound in its transmission--and--still citing it as a supporting text to bolster your legal position. It's like the other video I uploaded recently (on the widely quoted but unreliable ḥadīth: "God doesn't accept the prayer of an adult woman who prays without a headscarf _(khimār)");_ that's another ḥadīth that the majority cites, despite its inauthenticity. So I think every tradition expert is aware that this ḥadīth is chock-full of errors in its transmission. But regardless, this is the majority opinion...and this is a text that reinforces their view, so..🤷♀😅 Side note: I know some scholars may have no problem with that approach (rejecting/declaring a ḥadīth to be unreliable, which no one-as far as we know-previously rejected)...e.g. Ibn ʿUthaymīn's dismissal of the ḥadīth of the 'Antichrist's Spy' _(al-Jassāsa)_ in Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim (and when asked if he had any precedent from the _salaf_ (first Muslims) for this rejection, he said no, but that's not necessary). Rashīd Riḍā (d. 1935) also rejected it, but he's very recent. ...Anyways, I don't have anything against that approach (if a scholar's arguments are strong), because the possibility of error in transmission is always there (particularly with solitary reports, even if all the narrators have been deemed reliable), as Dhahabī and other ḥuffāẓ noted _(al-thiqa qad yaghlaṭ)._ But re Sh. Muṣṭafā, here, I don't think his style is to declare something weak that no expert in the past ever criticized. In fact, every criticism (of the transmission of this ḥadīth) that he points out in this video comes from earlier ḥadīth scholars who pointed out these exact flaws. So when he goes narrator by narrator, saying "this is the problem with him," he's referring to/regurgitating what classical experts in the field said. So every ḥadīth scholar who pointed out these same flaws in the past would've also considered this ḥadīth to be unreliable. OK, I saw al-Albānī (recent muḥaddith) say it's _ḥasan_ (passable) *due to other transmissions* (i.e. weak on its own) 😂 but Ibn Ḥajar, in his _Talkhīṣ,_ says Abū Dāwūd (d. 275/888) pointed out that it has a hidden flaw-that the transmission chain is disconnected (Khālid b. Durayk didn't hear from ʿĀʾisha). Noted ḥadīth expert Abū Ḥātim al-Rāzī (d. 277/890) also pointed out this flaw & said that the correct version of this report is the one with a disconnected chain (رجّح أبو حاتم أنه مرسل), because Khālid didn't hear from ʿĀʾish. Salafi scholars Ibn Bāz and Ibn ʿUthaymīn said it's very weak, disconnected and unsound *both* in its transmission and content (ضعيف سندًا ومتنًا). Ḥadīth critic Ibn al-Qaṭṭān (d. 628/1231) said it's weak (in his _Naẓar)._ Ibn Ṭāhir (d. 507/1113) said (in his _Dhakhīra)_ that it has an unreliable narrator (Saʿīd b. Bashīr) in its chain. Shāfiʿī jurist/ḥadīth scholar Ibn al-Mulaqqin (d. 804/1401), in his _al-Badr al-Munīr,_ said the ḥadīth is defective (maʿlūl). ✩ In his dictionary of criticized ḥadīth transmitters, Ibn ʿAdī (d. 365/977) also points out problems in its transmission chain. ✩ Imam al-Shawkānī (d. 1255/1839), in his _Nayl,_ notes that many ḥadīth experts have criticized a narrator in its chain (تكلم فيه غير واحد); al-Mundhirī (d. 656/1258) said the same. ✩ Ibn al-Turkumānī (d. 750/1349), in his _al-Jawhar al-Naqī,_ criticized multiple narrators in its chain-of-transmission (e.g. Walīd was a _mudallis_ (someone who engaged in the deceptive act of attributing the ḥadīth that one heard from a weak teacher to a more reliable one from whom different material was heard), and of Saʿīd b. Bashīr, ḥadīth critic Yaḥyā said: *"he's nothing,"* Ibn Numayr added that he transmitted suspect ḥadīth _(munkar al-ḥadīth),_ Nasāʾī said he was weak _(ḍaʿīf),_ and Ibn Ḥibbān said he made terrible mistakes _(fāḥish al-khaṭaʾ)_ in transmission). ✩ Dhahabī (d. 748/1348), while admitting the report is weak, asserts that "it[s meaning] can be corroborated by quotes of certain companions." But the bottom line is: from *the prophet himself,* we have nothing reliable that clearly defines what body parts a Muslim woman must cover in public. I know I made this comment way too long already 😥 but I'd be remiss if I didn't mention that Dr. Saʿd al-Dīn al-Hilālī (b. 1954--world-renowned scholar of Islamic law, professor of comparative jurisprudence at al-Azhar, who also trained muftis in the _Dar al-Ifta_ program) has also done some interviews recently, talking about the inauthenticity of this hadith. I wanted to add subs to those videos too, but they're a bit long (compared to ʿAdawī's nice soundbites 😅). But also, speaking of contemporary scholars saying this hadith is unsound, hadith researcher Aḥmad Rajab (on his RU-vid Channel, under the name: الباحث أحمد رجب) uploaded an 18 min. video (titled: الدرس الثاني عشر: صحة حديث: إذا بلغت المرأة المحيض لم تصلح أن يُرى منها إلا هذا وهذا), where he highlights 5 problems _(ʿilal)_ in the transmission of this hadith and concludes that it cannot be reliably traced to the Prophet.
