Is the Hadith in Abi Dawood's Book of Nikah (Hadith No. 2126), which narrates the marriage of a man from the Ansar to a virgin woman whom he found pregnant, and the subsequent saying of the Prophet (PBUH): "She is entitled to the dowry for what you have made lawful of her private parts, and the child is your slave. If she gives birth — Al-Hasan said: then flog her; and Ibn Abi Al-Sari said: then flog them, or he said: then apply the prescribed punishment to them" authentic or weak? If it is weak, what is the reason for its weakness, and what is the ruling derived from it?

The aforementioned hadith is very weak and has three defects: Ibn Jurayj's tadlis (concealment), his narration from Ibrahim ibn Abi Yahya who is matruk (abandoned), and the disagreement among narrators regarding its wasl (connected chain) and irsal (disconnected chain), with irsal being the more recognized form. Therefore, it cannot be used as proof in legal rulings. The rulings it contains must be presented to the established principles of Islamic law. The most important points mentioned in it are:

1. The invalidity of marriage to a pregnant woman due to zina.

2. The obligation of the full mahr (dowry) for a woman who has been consummated with, even if she committed zina.

3. Pregnancy as evidence of zina, but the majority of scholars do not consider it sufficient by itself for imposing the hadd punishment.

4. The child of zina being a slave to whoever marries its mother. There is no proof for this ruling except for this weak hadith, and scholars have unanimously agreed that the child of zina from a free woman is free.