It is baseless (La Asl Lahu), which is practically the same as fabricated (Mowdu’).
This narration is baseless (La Asl Lahu) and must not be attributed to the blessed Prophet ﷺ, as mentioned by numerous classical scholars.
الباذنجان لما اكل لَهُ. حَدِيث بَاطِل لَا اصل لَهُ. (اللآلئ المنثورة في الأحاديث المشهورة).
‘Aubergine is for whatever it is eaten for.’ This is a false narration, it is baseless (La Asl Lahu). (Imam al-Zarkashi, al-La’ali al-Manthoorah).
(حديث) “الْبَاذِنْجَانُ لِما أُكِلَ لَهُ” باطل لا أصل له، ومن قال من العوام إنه أصح من حديث “ماَءُ زَمْزَمَ لِمَا شُرِبَ لَهُ” فقد أخطأ خطأً قبيحاً. قلت: ولم أقف له على إِسناد إلا في تاريخ بلخ وهو موضوع. (الدرر المنتثرة في الأحاديث المشتهرة).
The narration, ‘Aubergine is for whatever it is eaten for,’ is false and it is baseless (La Asl Lahu). And whoever amongst the common people says, it is more authentic than the Hadith, ‘The water of Zamzam is whatever it is consumed for,’ has indeed erred and made a vile mistake. And I say, I did not find a chain for it except in ‘Tareekh Balkh,’ and it is fabricated. (Imam al-Sayuti, al-Durar al-Manthoorah).
حَدِيث: الْبَاذِنْجَانُ لِمَا أُكِلَ لَهُ، باطل لا أصل له. (المقاصد الحسنة).
The narration, ‘Aubergine is for whatever it is eaten for,’ is false and it is baseless (La Asl Lahu). (Imam al-Sakhaawi, al-Maqaasid al-Hasanah).
Although there is a significant difference between a baseless narration (La Asl Lahu) and a fabricated (Mowdu’) one, in terms of its definition, they are the same in terms of usage. Meaning, in both cases, it is prohibited to narrate such Hadith narrations unless you are informing people that they are fabricated. Since this narration is baseless (La Asl Lahu), it is prohibited to attribute it to the Holy Prophet ﷺ.
And Allah (Most High) Knows Best.
– Answered by Shaykh Noorud-deen (23.06.2021)
Are there authentic Hadith encouraging us to eat aubergine?
Is the Hadith, Aubergine is a cure for every illness, authentic?
See also (video):