From the vast heritage of criticism and narration to Imam al Bukhari (d. 256 AH)

BACK⇒ Return to Table of contents

 

From the vast heritage of criticism and narration to Imam al Bukhari (d. 256 AH)

 

In this section, I present the arrival of the heritage of criticism to Imam al Bukhari and the formation of his critical personality and the factors influencing that. Then I show Imam al Bukhari’s critical output in his books and his students. Thereafter, I detail the ways in which the narrations reached al Bukhari and the centrality of his al Sahih among the books of the Sunnah, explaining what distinguishes the al Sahih. Then I present issues related to the objectivity of al Bukhari and the criticism directed at his al Sahih. I conclude all of this by studying the ahadith that he narrated in isolation in his al Sahih over all the books of the Sunnah.

 

1. The heritage of criticism and the critical personality of al Bukhari

It has been mentioned previously that a vast heritage of criticism of narrators and narrations preceded Imam al Bukhari (d. 256 AH) and that the critical statements issued by the Imams before the era of al Bukhari regarding narrators and narrations amount to tens of thousands. When Ibn Ma’in (d. 233 AH) discussed thousands of narrators, their conditions, and their ahadith, and he was a single critic, then how would it be if the criticism of Ahmed ibn Hanbal (d. 241 AH), ‘Ali ibn al Madini (d. 234 AH), Abu Khaythamah (d. 234 AH), Ishaq Ibn Rahawayh (d. 238 AH) and others were added to him? Furthermore, if the criticism of their sheikhs, such as Yahya al Qattan (d. 198 AH), ‘Abdul Rahman ibn Mahdi (d. 198 AH), Waki’ (d. 197 AH), ‘Affan ibn Muslim (d. 220 AH), Yazid ibn Harun (d. 206 AH), and the criticism of the sheikhs of their sheikhs, such as Shu’bah (d. 160 AH), Hammad ibn Salamah (d. 167 AH), Hammad ibn Zaid al Basri (d. 179 AH), al Thawri (d. 161 AH), and Malik (d. 179 AH) is added to that? This means that al Bukhari grew up in a critical society par excellence. A society with long experience in criticism, wherein criticism became more active, distinct, and precise; and the critical scholar at that time was a famous star. He was the one who was received with grand reception in cities and countries. Gatherings were held for him, which were attended by thousands, narrators feared him, and students paid attention to his opinions and disseminated them. Thus, the scholarly privilege in the third century was for the critical Hadith scholars. Whoever stood out in the critical scholarly society was distinguished and people in various countries benefited from him.

Al Bukhari grew up in this society and saw the reverence for the Muhaddithin and the Imams of criticism. That reverence was found within his small home and his private family, as his father was one of those who paid attention to Hadith and its transmission. It seems as though he greatly respected the Imams of criticism and narration, to the point that when al Bukhari wrote his biography, he mentioned that he saw Hammad ibn Zaid and heard from Malik ibn Anas. He added that he:

 

صافح ابن المبارك بكلتا يديه

He shook Ibn al Mubarak’s both hands.^[1]

 

It was as if this mere handshake with that great critic was discussed in the gatherings of the house and al Bukhari heard his father boasting about it, which created great and high respect in al Bukhari for those sciences and those critics.

This is the first factor that moulded al Bukhari’s critical personality, i.e. the critical society that inherited the extended sciences of criticism and the respect for that society in the small family.

Then comes another factor, which is the critical talent that Allah bestowed al Bukhari with, and that talent appeared early in his life. In the famous incident about him, he was asked about the beginning of his life in Hadith. He said:

 

ألهمت حفظ الحديث وأنا في الكتّاب قال وكم أتى عليك إذ ذاك قال عشر سنين أو أقل

I was inspired to memorise Hadith while I was in elementary school.

He was asked, “How old were you at that time?”

He said, “Ten years or less.”^[2]

 

Then al Bukhari mentioned that which shows his critical personality since his childhood and that he would scrutinise the sheikhs when hearing ahadith, when he was not yet eleven years old. He mentioned that he was studying by al Dakhili. He narrated a hadith stating:

 

سفيان عن أبي الزبير عن إبراهيم فاعترضه البخاري بقوله إن أبا الزبير لم يرو عن إبراهيم ‏ قال البخاري فانتهرني فقلت له ارجع إلى الأصل إن كان عندك فدخل ونظر فيه ثم خرج فقال لي كيف هو يا غلام قلت هو الزبير بن عدي بن إبراهيم فأخذ القلم مني وأحكم كتابه فقال صدقت

Sufyan narrated from Abu al Zubair — from Ibrahim. Al Bukhari objected to him by saying, “Abu al Zubair did not narrate from Ibrahim.”

Al Bukhari states, “He rebuked me, so I said to him, ‘Go back to the original if you have it.’”

He entered, looked at it, and then came out and said to me, “How is it, boy?”

I said, “It is al Zubair ibn ‘Adi ibn Ibrahim.” Then he took the pen from me, corrected his book, and said, “You are right.”^[3]

 

Al Bukhari was aware of the paths of narrations and the relationship of the sheikhs with narrators and cities, since his childhood, and therefore he corrected his sheikh and his statement was correct.

A third factor is that al Bukhari received the sciences of criticism from the greatest scholars of his time. In Basrah, he met the Sheikh of criticism, ‘Ali ibn al Madini and Abu Hafs ‘Amr ibn ‘Ali al Fallas (d. 249 AH). In Baghdad, he met Ahmed ibn Hanbal and Yahya ibn Ma’in.^[4] He met Ishaq ibn Rahawayh, Abu Khaythamah, and Muhammad ibn ‘Abdullah ibn Numair in Kufah, and others. He studied from them, heard their criticism, and acquired the criticism of their sheikhs from them. Al Bukhari acquired tens of thousands of statements about narrators and narrations, so he assimilated the method of critics and gained expertise in it. The one from whom al Bukhari acquired most was the great critic ‘Ali ibn al Madini (d. 234 AH). It seems that al Bukhari preferred him to other senior critics because of his in-depth knowledge in the science of ‘Ilal al Hadith in particular. This refers to a delicate science that extracts small, subtle, and obscure errors from narrations that appear to be correct at first glance. The Imams of Hadith do not differ on the fact that ‘Ali ibn al Madini was the most knowledgeable of his peers in ‘Ilal al Hadith.^[5] Hence, al Bukhari would say about him:

 

ما استصغرت نفسي عند أحد إلا عند علي بن المديني

I never considered myself insignificant in anyone’s presence except ‘Ali ibn al Madini.^[6]

 

When al Bukhari was asked about things he desired, he would say:

 

أشتهي أن أقدم العراق وعلي بن عبد الله حي فأجالسه

I desire to go to Iraq while ‘Ali ibn ‘Abdullah is alive so that I can sit with him.^[7]

 

Thus, sitting with Ibn al Madini was al Bukhari’s pleasure in this world. Al Bukhari benefited greatly from him.

This acquisition was not a mere acquisition of a novice student from a critical sheikh, but rather al Bukhari’s meeting with them was a meeting of a Muhaddith who had gathered a lot, scrutinised, and criticised them. They were meetings of benefit and discussion more than mere acquisition. This is clear from the texts that were mentioned wherein these scholars showed their great astonishment at al Bukhari’s scholarly and critical personality. Perhaps the most important texts mentioned in this regard are those that were mentioned regarding his relationship with his sheikh Ibn al Madini. When al Bukhari mentioned his famous statement, mentioned above, in praise of Ibn al Madini, that he regarded himself insignificant in front of him, he followed it with his saying:

 

وربما كنت أغرب عليه

Sometimes I would exaggerate upon him.^[8]

 

This means that Ibn al Madini was deriving benefits from him regarding that which he did not know, and they were valuable, precious, and unique benefits. This is confirmed by the fact that Ibn al Madini would ask him about the sheikhs of Khurasan, and relied on his praise for them and his tawthiq regarding them.^[9] Ibn al Madini would say about him:

 

هو ما رأى مثل نفسه

He has never seen anyone like himself.^[10]

 

Some of Ibn al Madini’s students said:

 

أتيت علي ابن المديني فرأيت محمد ابن إسماعيل جالسا عن يمينه وكان إذا حدث التفت إليه كأنه يهابه

I came to Ibn al Madini and I saw Muhammad ibn Ismail sitting on his right. Whenever he narrated, he would turn towards him as if he feared him.^[11]

 

All of this was before the year 230 AH, i.e. before the death of Ibn al Madini in 234 AH. Al Bukhari had not yet reached forty years of his life, so he was still a young man. However, his most eminent sheikh of criticism acknowledged his status, which means that he was distinguished and different from the people of his time.

In fact, his sheikhs praised him before that. Among the most eminent of al Bukhari’s sheikhs was Muhammad ibn Bashshar, known as Bundar (d. 252 AH). Muhammad ibn Ibrahim al Bushanji reported:

 

سمعت‏ بندارا محمد بن بشار سنة ثمان وعشرين ومئتين يقول ما قدم علينا مثل محمد بن إسماعيل

I heard Bundar, Muhammad ibn Bashshar, in the year 228 AH, saying, “No one like Muhammad ibn Ismail has come to us.”^[12]

 

Al Bukhari’s age, at that time, was not more than 34 years. This is a valuable testimony from the Hafiz of Basrah regarding him. It is reported that when he met him for the first time, he took his hand, embraced him, and said to him:

 

مرحبا‏ بمن أفتخر به منذ سنين

Welcome to the one I have been boasting about for years.^[13]

 

This means that al Bukhari’s reputation in memorisation and criticism had reached those cities, years before he reached there, that is, before he reached the age of thirty, without a doubt.

The testimonies of his critic sheikhs are many, which confirm that he did not come to them as a beginner student, but rather as a knowledgeable and understanding student. His sheikh Ahmed ibn Hanbal praised his scholarly and critical personality by saying:

 

ما أخرجت خراسان مثل محمد بن إسماعيل

Khurasan has not produced anyone like Muhammad ibn Ismail.^[14]

 

Similarly, from his sheikh, Ishaq ibn Rahawayh, when he wrote the book al Tarikh, Ishaq took it, brought it to ‘Abdullah ibn Tahir, and said:

 

أيها الأمير ألا أريك سحرا قال فنظر فيه عبد الله بن طاهر فتعجب منه وقال لست أفهم تصنيفه

“O Amir (leader), shall I not show you magic?” He says that ‘Abdullah ibn Tahir looked at it and was amazed by it and said, “I do not understand his writing.”^[15]

 

Likewise, his Sheikh Abu Hafs ‘Amr ibn ‘Ali al Fallas (d. 249 AH) showered high praises on him. He was a highly respected critical Imam. Al Bukhari quotes his statements on Jarh and Ta’dil, relies on them, and narrates from him in al Sahih. Al Bukhari states:

 

ذاكرني أصحاب عمرو بن علي بحديث فقلت لا أعرفه فسروا بذلك وساروا إلى عمرو بن علي فقالوا له ذاكرنا محمد بن إسماعيل البخاري بحديث فلم يعرفه فقال عمرو بن علي حديث لا يعرفه محمد بن إسماعيل ليس بحديث

The companions of ‘Amr ibn ‘Ali reminded me of a hadith. I said, “I do not know it.”

They were pleased with that, went to ‘Amr ibn ‘Ali, and said to him, “We reminded Muhammad ibn Ismail al Bukhari of a hadith, but he did not know it.”

‘Amr ibn ‘Ali said, “A hadith that Muhammad ibn Ismail does not know is not a hadith.”^[16]

 

His two sheikhs of Kufah; Abu Bakr ibn Abi Shaybah, (d. 235 AH) and Muhammad ibn ‘Abdullah ibn Numair (d. 234 AH), would say:

 

ما رأينا مثل محمد بن إسماعيل

We have not seen anyone like Muhammad ibn Ismail.^[17]

 

Salih ibn Muhammad al Asadi, known as Jazarah (d. 293 AH), praised him by saying:

 

ما رأيت خراسانيا أفهم منه

I have not seen a Khurasani more knowledgeable than him.^[18]

 

All of these testimonies indicate to the presence of a distinguished personality, completely distinct from his peers, which is what qualified him for all that reputation later on.

A fourth factor is attached to these factors, which is the complete dedication of Imam al Bukhari to this field, as he was not preoccupied with anything else throughout his life. It is not known that he was occupied with buying, selling, and relations with political authority or people. His first and last goal was Hadith narration and criticism, which generated a great ambition and rare interest in these ahadith. This is evident in the story reported by his scribe, Muhammad ibn Abi Hatim, where he states:

 

كان أبو عبد الله إذا كنت معه في سفر يجمعنا بيت واحد إلا في القيظ أحيانا فكنت أراه يقوم في ليلة واحدة خمسة عشرة مرة إلى عشرين مرة في كل ذلك يأخذ القداحة فيوري نارا بيده ويسرج ثم خرج أحاديث فيعلّم عليها ثم يضع رأسه

Whenever I was with him on a journey, we would gather in one house except during the summer sometimes. I would see him get up fifteen to twenty times in one night. Every time, he would take a lighter, light a fire with his hands, then he would take out ahadith and mark them, then he would put his head down.^[19]

 

This displays complete devotion to this science, to the point that his sleep is interrupted many times. It is as if he sleeps thinking about those narrations. If an idea comes to him, he gets up for those narrations, marks some of them, and then sleeps again. He repeats that many times every night.

It remains that al Bukhari showed little interest in other things. This enabled him to pay complete attention to every minute of his time. He did not spend his time in anything except in what was beneficial. Therefore, his student Muhammad ibn Abi Hatim was surprised one day when he saw him lying down without doing anything, so he asked him about that in an amusing story. His scribe (Ibn Abi Hatim) says:

 

ورأيته استلقى على قفاه يوما ونحن بفربر في تصنيف كتاب التفسير وكان أتعب نفسه في ذلك اليوم في كثرة إخراج الحديث فقلت له يا أبا عبد الله سمعتك تقول يوما إني ما أتيت شيئا بغير علم قط منذ عقلت فأي علم في هذا الاستلقاء فقال أتعبنا أنفسنا في هذا اليوم وهذا ثغر من الثغور خشيت أن يحدث حدث من أمر العدو فأحببت أن أستريح وآخذ أهبة ذلك فإن غافصنا العدو كان بنا حراك

I saw him lying on his back one day while we were in Firabr, compiling Kitab al Tafsir. He had tired himself that day, extracting plenty Hadith, so I said to him, “O Abu ‘Abdullah, I heard you say one day that you have never done anything without knowledge since you came of age. What knowledge is there in this lying down?”

He said, “We tired ourselves today and this is one of the frontier areas. I feared that an event might occur from the enemy’s side, so I wanted to rest and take precautions for that. If the enemy surprised us, we would be mobile.”^[20]

 

This shows a great investment of time and little attention about what does not concern or benefit which results in devotion and preoccupation with the purpose and goal.

 

2. Critical products of Imam al Bukhari

Perhaps the most important critical products wherein al Bukhari’s personality became evident were three: The book al Tarikh al Kabir, the book al Sahih, and his influence on his students.

 

First: The Book al Tarikh al Kabir

Al Bukhari compiled the book al Tarikh al Kabir. He started writing it as a young man, as he was not more than 18 years old at that time, during his stay in Madinah, intending to start it in the Prophet’s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam Masjid, at the grave of the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, on moonlit nights.^[21] Then he produced it to the people three times and continued to amend and revise it until the end of his life.^[22]

He mentioned more than 13 000 narrators of Hadith in it. It was his method to mention the name of the narrator and his lineage, and then mention his most important sheikhs to show his class, and his most important students. Sometimes he mentions some of their ahadith, and shows any defects, or some critical statements about the narrator. All of that was mentioned through brief texts, and hints that needed clarifications and explanations.

Perhaps this is one of the most important features of al Bukhari’s critical personality, as he was a man of hints, not a man of explicitness. There was a big difference between his personality and that of Ibn Ma’in, as we notice Ibn Ma’in’s spontaneity in expression and judgement of narrators and narrations. As for al Bukhari, he almost weighs every word he says and puts it in its intended place.

This is evident in the many hints he mentions in al Tarikh al Kabir, which can hardly be understood at first glance unless they are joint to their counterparts and discussed with their evidences. Then only they become clear and apparent.

Therefore, it can be said that this book is one of the first academic books that were compiled in the sciences of narrators, their criticism, and ahadith. This is such, because most of the books that preceded it were questions that the student directed to his critic sheikh, as in the case of Ibn Ma’in and Ahmed ibn Hanbal. Therefore, tremendous spontaneity appeared in Ibn Ma’in’s expressions, as noted in the previous chapter. Unlike al Bukhari’s book, as he compiled it in his own way of precision and mastery. Every name in it had a purpose and significance, and it contains many critical hints, which show the mastery and ability of this Imam in the knowledge of narrators and the narrations. It appears that al Bukhari intended brevity and those hints, as he said:

 

كل اسم في التاريخ إلا وله عندي قصة إلا أني كرهت تطويل الكتاب

I have a story for every name mentioned in al Tarikh, except that I disliked lengthening the book.^[23]

 

As for those hints, some of al Bukhari’s sheikhs described it as magic. Ishaq ibn Rahawayh took it and brought it to ‘Abdullah ibn Tahir and said:

 

أيها الأمير ألا أريك سحرا قال فنظر فيه عبد الله بن طاهر فتعجب منه وقال لست أفهم تصنيفه

O Amir, shall I not show you magic? He says that ‘Abdullah ibn Tahir looked at it and was amazed by it and said, “I do not understand his writing.”^[24]

 

It is natural that the Amir would not understand it and that Ishaq would describe it as magic, since expressions and hints were extremely abundant in it. Al Bukhari said regarding it:

 

لو نشر بعض أستاذي هؤلاء لم يفهموا كيف صنفت كتاب التاريخ ولا عرفوه ثم قال صنفته ثلاث مرات

If some of my teachers published it, they would not understand how I compiled the book al Tarikh, nor would they know it. Then he said, “I compiled it three times.”^[25]

 

Therefore, it is mentioned that al Bukhari was not preceded in this book. Imam Abu Ahmed al Hakim al Kabir (d. 378 AH) said:

 

وكتاب‏ محمد بن إسماعيل في التاريخ كتاب لم يسبق إليه ومن ألف بعده شيئا من التاريخ أو الأسماء والكنى لم يستغن عنه فمنهم من نسبه إلى نفسه مثل أبي زرعة وأبي حاتم ومسلم ومنهم من حكاه عنه فالله يرحمه فإنه الذي أصّل الأصول

The book of Muhammad ibn Ismail on Tarikh is a book that was not preceded by anyone. Whoever wrote anything after him on Tarikh or Asma’ wa al Kuna (names and agnomens) could not do without it. Some of them attributed it to themselves, such as Abu Zur’ah, Abu Hatim, and Muslim, whilst others narrated it from him. May Allah have mercy on him, for he is the one who established the principles.^[26]

 

Ibn Rajab (d. 795 AH) said:

 

وقد سبق الناس إلى تصنيف الصحيح والتاريخ

He preceded the people in the tasnif of al Sahih and al Tarikh.^[27]

 

These hints become evident in the following example. Al Bukhari said:

 

سعيد بن أبي عروبة أبو النضر واسم أبي عروبة مهران مولى لبني عدي بن يشكر البصري قال عبد الصمد مات سنة ست وخمسين ومئة وقال حفص بن عمر مات قبل الدستوائي بنحو من ثلاث سنين وقال أبو نعيم كتبت عنه بعد ما اختلط حديثين سمع النضر ابن أنس

Sa’id ibn Abi ‘Arubah, Abu al Nadr. Abu ‘Arubah’s name is Mahran, the freed slave of Banu ‘Adi ibn Yashkur al Basri. ‘Abdul Samad said that he passed away in the year 156 AH. Hafs ibn ‘Umar said that he passed away about three years before al Dastawa’i. Abu Nuaim said that I wrote two ahadith from him after he became mukhtalit. He heard from al Nadr ibn Anas.^[28]

 

The last sentence appears to be a sentence that shows that Sa’id heard from al Nadr, but the question remains that Sa’id ibn Abi ‘Arubah is one of the scholars of Basrah who heard the most ahadith, as he narrated from the great students of Anas ibn Malik, such as Qatadah and others, and he has hundreds of sheikhs. Why did al Bukhari focus on one sheikh and express that he heard from al Nadr?

The answer is that Sa’id did not acquire from al Nadr except one hadith, as he narrated from Qatadah — from al Nadr. He did not acquire knowledge (directly) from al Nadr as he passed away early.^[29] However, he heard only one hadith from him and in that hadith he (al Nadr) did not narrate to Sa’id, rather he narrated it to Qatadah. The hadith is that which al Bukhari narrated in his al Sahih from ‘Abdul A’la who states:

 

حدثنا سعيد قال سمعت النضر بن أنس بن مالك يحدث قتادة قال كنت عند ابن عباس وهم يسألونه ولا يذكر النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم حتى سئل

Sa’id narrated to us that he heard al Nadr ibn Anas ibn Malik narrating to Qatadah saying, “I was with Ibn ‘Abbas while they were asking him. He did not mention the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam until he was asked.”^[30]

 

Al Bukhari states in his al Sahih:

 

سمع‏ سعيد بن أبي عروبة من النضر بن أنس هذا الواحد

Sa’id ibn Abi ‘Arubah heard this single hadith from al Nadr Ibn Anas.^[31]

 

It is as if al Bukhari is showing the intricate aspects in Sa’id’s sheikhs, not the well-known and famous aspects.

From this, some of the senior research professors of our time see that the book al Tarikh al Kabir was more like a database which Imam al Bukhari utilised in the tasnif of his book al Sahih, and that the reader of al Sahih will not understand it unless he understands the many critical hints in al Tarikh al Kabir, al Tarikh al Awsat, and al Tarikh al Saghir.^[32]

 

Second: The book al Sahih

This contains a lot of criticism and the mere selection and choice is criticism, which I will explain in a special chapter.

 

Third: His influence on his students

Al Bukhari influenced groups of students and they benefitted greatly from him. The most eminent of them, who recorded al Bukhari’s critical statements, was Imam al Tirmidhi (d. 279 AH) in his questions to al Bukhari, which is published under the title, al ‘Ilal al Kabir and in other works also, such as al ‘Ilal al Saghir.

Al Tirmidhi stated that al Bukhari is the most prominent of those from whom the science of criticism was acquired. He states:

 

لم أر أحدا بالعراق ولا بخراسان في معنى العلل والتاريخ ومعرفة الأسانيد كبير أحد أعلم من محمد بن إسماعيل

I have not seen anyone in Iraq or Khurasan more knowledgeable in the meanings of ‘Ilal, Tarikh, and knowledge of isnad than Muhammad ibn Ismail.^[33]

 

Among his great critic students is Imam Ibn Khuzaimah (d. 311 AH) who said about him:

 

ما رأيت تحت أديم هذه السماء أعلم بالحديث من محمد بن إسماعيل البخاري

I have not seen anyone under this sky more knowledgeable about Hadith than Muhammad ibn Ismail al Bukhari.^[34]

 

Praise of such great people for al Bukhari is a manifestation of his rank, knowledge, and high status.

 

3. The Heritage of Narration and the Centrality of Sahih al Bukhari

In this section, I will present the methods that al Bukhari relied on in compiling his al Sahih, and then I will present the reasons for distinguishing his al Sahih from other books of Sunnah.

 

First: How did al Bukhari compile the al Sahih from that heritage?

It has been mentioned previously that hundreds of thousands of narrations of ahadith spread in the early third century. This spread was due to the isnad, along with the scholars’ knowledge of the sahih and proven ahadith, in general, even though they differed in some of them. However, that was also known to them.

Al Bukhari acquired this heritage. He collected the ahadith of his compatriots and then travelled to many countries to collect Hadith. It was a great project in his mind, which continued for many years. Hadith had spread extensively due to the travels in the Islamic countries and Hadith gatherings became abundant, well-known, and widespread. A narrator would take one hadith from dozens of sheikhs, all of whom confirm the same narration. Thus, it is natural—and it was such—for al Bukhari to find the same hadith narrated in Kufah from many sheikhs from Sufyan ibn ‘Uyaynah (d. 198 AH) — from al Zuhri (d. 4-12 AH). Similarly, he would find it in Madinah as well, from many sheikhs from Malik (d. 179 AH) — from al Zuhri, and so on. Therefore, he collected hundreds of thousands of ahadith. By ahadith, we mean the isnad of narrations. For example, the text of one hadith through one Companion would have dozens of various isnad. See Figure 2.

The narrations and isnad he collected amounted to approximately six hundred thousand narrations, from more than a thousand sheikhs.^[35] Then al Bukhari began his lifelong project, which lasted for sixteen years. This was to purify and refine those ahadith in order to extract the most authentic narrations from them, in his book al Sahih. In this regard, he said:

 

صنفت كتابي الصحيح لست عشرة سنة خرجته من ستمئة ألف حديث وجعلته حجة فيما بيني وبين الله تعالى

I compiled my book al Sahih in sixteen years. I extracted it from 600 000 ahadith, and I made it a proof between Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala and myself.^[36]

 

The number of ahadith, without repetition, in it is approximately 2500 ahadith,^[37] and with repetitions, it was more than 7 000 ahadith. Accordingly, sixteen years was a vast amount of time for this compilation, which qualified al Bukhari to purify and refine it with precision.

He would carefully scrutinise and think before including each hadith in al Sahih. This is evident in his statement:

 

ما وضعت في كتاب الصحيح حديثا إلا اغتسلت قبل ذلك وصليت ركعتين

I did not include any hadith in the book al Sahih except that I bathed before that and performed two rak’at.^[38]

 

His method of collecting and selecting those ahadith can be established from two ways:

1. His reliance on the famous and well-known tasnif of the Atba’ al Tabi’in.

The ahadith of the Atba’ al Tabi’in were transmitted to Imam al Bukhari through one or two generations. For example, al Bukhari narrated from his sheikh — from Malik, and he narrated from his sheikh — from one of Malik’s students — from Malik. One of the most important outcomes of the era of al Muwatta’ and other compilations was that later scholars relied heavily on them in their compiled books in the third century AH.

Every author had a path through which he acquired the book of Malik. For example, Imam Ahmed ibn Hanbal included, in his al Musnad, the marfu’ ahadith found in the al Muwatta’ of Imam Malik, and he narrated them from ‘Abdul Rahman ibn Mahdi (d. 198 AH) — from Malik. Al Bukhari chose to rely on ‘Abdullah ibn Yusuf al Tanisi (d. 217 AH) in his narration of the al Muwatta’ of Malik. Ibn ‘Adi (d. 365 AH) said in his biography:

 

والبخاري مع شدة استقصائه اعتمد عليه في مالك وغيره ومنه سمع الموطأ

Al Bukhari, despite his great thoroughness, relied on him regarding Malik and others, and heard the al Muwatta’ from him.^[39]

 

Therefore, we find most of the narrations from Imam Malik through ‘Abdullah ibn Yusuf al Tanisi, even though he narrated from others also. Imam Muslim (d. 261 AH) relied on Yahya ibn Yahya al Naysaburi (d. 226 AH) while Imam Abu Dawood (d. 275 AH) and al Nasa’i (d. 303 AH) relied on ‘Abdullah ibn Maslamah al Qa’nabi (d. 221 AH). A group of Imams preferred him to others in al Muwatta’.^[40]

What is said about al Muwatta’ can be said about other collections and compilations, as the authors of the six books relied heavily on the books compiled at the end of the second century and the beginning of the third AH, as established by Fuad Sezgin.^[41]

2. The oral narrations that he heard in Hadith gatherings he attended.

The Muhaddithin at that time would continuously pride themselves for their memorisation—even if it was very little—and that they were able to narrate Hadith from memory without a book. Among the most famous of al Bukhari’s sheikhs who memorised without a book, was Sulaiman ibn Harb al Basri (d. 422 AH). He was one of his most prominent sheikhs. He narrated from Shu’bah, Hammad ibn Zaid, and Hammad ibn Salamah. Al Bukhari acquired from him and elevated his isnad through him.^[42] He would not narrate from a book and would only narrate from memory. His student Abu Hatim al Razi (d. 77 AH) stated:

 

وقد ظهر من حديثه نحو عشرة آلاف ما رأيت في يده‎ ‏كتابا قط وكان لا يسأل عن حديث إلا حدث من حفظه وسئل عن حديث‎ فتح مكة فحدثنا به من حفظه

Around ten thousand of his ahadith have appeared. I never saw a book in his hand.^[43] He was never asked about a hadith except that he narrated it from memory. He was asked about the hadith of the conquest of Makkah and he narrated it to us from memory.^[44]

 

Sulaiman’s gatherings would be filled with students because of his majesty, his memory, and high isnad. Abu Hatim said:

 

ولقد حضرت مجلس سليمان بن حرب‎ ببغداد فحزروا من حضر مجلسه أربعين ألف رجل

I attended the gathering of Sulaiman ibn Harb in Baghdad. They estimated that forty thousand people attended his gathering.^[45]

 

Accordingly, some of the sheikhs narrated from a book and some of them narrated from memory, however, the majority narrated from books. The claim that al Bukhari only heard from compiled books, without hearing from the words of the sheikh, is far from Hadith reality.

However, this issue itself requires detailed specialised scholarly studies to understand the nature of al Bukhari’s benefit from written and oral sources, and to try to ascertain their ratio, which is what Dr. Fuad Sezgin tried to highlight. However, the matter remained open for discussion after that and has not been fulfilled.^[46]

 

Second: Why is Sahih al Bukhari distinguished from other books of the Sunnah?

Many Muhaddithin wrote important books on tasnif of the Sunnah, as mentioned previously. The most famous of which are the six well-known books. Some of them specialised in compiling sahih ahadith in their books, such as Sahih Muslim ibn al Hajjaj (d. 261 AH), Sahih Ibn Khuzaimah (d. 311 AH), Sahih Ibn Hibban (d. 354 AH), Mustadrak al Hakim (d. 405 AH), and others.

Naming their books as sahih, does not differ from Sahih al Bukhari, as far as the name is concerned, as Ibn Hibban believed that everything in his book was sahih. In fact, when al Hakim compiled the Mustadrak, he intended to redress al Bukhari and Muslim in sahih ahadith, according to their conditions, which they did not narrate. Hence, very often he uses the phrase:

 

صحيح على شرط الشيخين ولم يخرجاه

Sahih according to the condition of Sheikhayn (i.e. al Bukhari and Muslim), and they did not narrate it.

 

However, the scholars did not rely on the tashih of Ibn Khuzaimah, Ibn Hibban and al Hakim as they relied on the tashih of al Bukhari and Muslim. They placed al Bukhari in first position above all the books of Sunnah and they declared that:

 

إنه أصح كتاب بعد كتاب الله

It is the most authentic book after the Book of Allah.

 

All their statements collaborated that. Al Dhahabi (d. 748 AH) said:

 

وأما جامعه الصحيح فأجل كتب الإسلام وأفضلها بعد كتاب الله

As for his al Jami’ al Sahih, it is the most prominent book of Islam, and the best of them after the Book of Allah.^[47]

 

Prior to that, Ibn al Salah (d. 643 AH) and al Nawawi (d. 676 AH) mentioned:

 

أن أصح الكتب بعد كتاب الله العزيز الصحيحان البخاري ومسلم وتلقتهما الأمة بالقبول وكتاب البخاري أصحهما وأكثرهما فوائد

The most authentic books after the Book of Allah are the Sahihs of al Bukhari and Muslim. The Ummah has accepted them. Al Bukhari’s book is more authentic and more beneficial of the two.^[48]

 

The scholars of Hadith did not rule all the ahadith of the other books that were called sahih, to be sahih, even though its authors named them as sahih. The reason for that was not due to prominence of al Bukhari’s personality, his religiousness, his mazhab, or anything related to that, as others may surpass him in such issues. The only reason that resulted in the scholar’s preference of al Bukhari over other books of Sunnah is that senior scholars and critics conducted an in-depth and detail study of his book. They also studied other books and found that al Bukhari’s method was stronger, more intense, more accurate, and deeper. Thus, the scholarly method, not anything else, was taken into consideration.

Here, by method I refer to the method al Bukhari utilised in selecting his ahadith in al Sahih, which is what scholars termed as ‘al Bukhari’s conditions in his al Sahih.’ Selecting sahih ahadith was the fundamental objective of the book, not titles of the chapters, fiqh, and sayings of the Companions and Tabi’in^[49] that it contains. Therefore, I will suffice, here, with presenting his method in selecting sahih ahadith and explaining its features.

 

The First Feature: Selecting the highest degrees of authenticity

Al Bukhari’s methodology (his conditions) in selecting ahadith was a high and precise methodology. A sahih hadith, as is established, is that hadith whose isnad is continuous, through the transmission of an ‘adil and dabit person from another similar person till the end of the isnad, without being shadh (anomalous) or defective. Thus, there are five conditions according to what is known and famous. Al Bukhari was precise and intense in all of them. Hereunder are the details.

As for ittisal (continuity is isnad), it is well-known that al Bukhari made liqa’ (meeting) between the narrator and his sheikh a condition, and he did not suffice with them being contemporaries. Imam Muslim and a large group of critics sufficed with the narrator and his sheikh being contemporaries and the possibility of liqa’, not its confirmation. Many texts from al Bukhari show that the issue of ittisal and confirmation of liqa’ is central in his criticism, which shows more scrutiny from him and the preference of Sahih al Bukhari over Sahih Muslim.^[50]

As for ‘adalah (integrity), the number of narrators criticised in Sahih al Bukhari due to their ‘adalah is very little. Most of the criticism is due to the innovation of the narrator, not due to his lying or sin.^[51] This gives Sahih al Bukhari more strength, as it shows his objectivity and that he did not suffice in narrating from those who were aligned to his ideological circle. More details of objectivity will come in the Fourth Section.

As for dabt (accuracy), al Bukhari avoided the ahadith of some of the senior and thiqah scholars, because their accuracy was not according to the level that he was satisfied. Perhaps the most prominent of them is Hammad ibn Salamah (d. 167 AH), the Imam, the pious scholar, the worshipper, and one of great stature. Al Bukhari only narrated one hadith from him and that too, it was not the main hadith of that chapter.^[52] Muslim differed from al Bukhari and narrated several ahadith from him. Similarly, Ibn Hibban also relied on him in his al Sahih and criticised al Bukhari for not narrating the Hadith of Hammad ibn Salamah.^[53]

As for the Hadith being free of shudhudh (anomaly) and ‘illah (defect), al Bukhari avoided many mu’allal (defective) ahadith, even though the isnad apparently seemed to be authentic. However, he noticed a hidden and ambiguous meaning in them, so he avoided them. Imam al Hakim (d. 5/40 AH) was deceived by the apparent isnad of some of those ahadith. Hence, he judged them as sahih according to al Bukhari’s condition, despite the fact that al Bukhari stated in other places in his books that they were defective.^[54]

In fact, Imam Muslim—the great scholar, critic and Hafiz—one day, mentioned a hadith that he regarded as sahih in the presence of al Bukhari. Al Bukhari explained to him with careful scrutiny its hidden and ambiguous defect. Then it became clear to Muslim, and he said:

 

لا يبغضك إلا حاسد وأشهد أن ليس في الدنيا مثلك

Only a jealous person will hate you. I testify that there is no one like you in the world.^[55]

 

He said to him:

 

دعني‏ حتى أقبل رجليك يا أستاذ الأستاذين وسيد المحدثين وطبيب الحديث في علله

Allow me to kiss your feet, O teacher of teachers, leader of the Muhaddithin, and doctor of Hadith in its ‘Ilal.^[56]

 

Added to that, is what the scholars mentioned, that the number of ahadith that were criticised in Sahih al Bukhari is less than the number of ahadith that were criticised in Sahih Muslim,^[57] and likewise, much less than the ahadith criticised in Ibn Khuzaimah, Ibn Hibban, and al Hakim.

Due to all these reasons, scholars preferred Sahih al Bukhari to others, as they noticed his strictness in the conditions. However, this does not mean that the ahadith in the other authentic books are da’if, rather they are strong in general, but their conditions were not on the same level as that of al Bukhari.

 

The Second Feature: Between selecting the most sahih ahadith and the most thiqah narrators

Al Bukhari called his book al Jami’ al Musnad al Sahih al Mukhtasar Min Umur Rasul al Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam wa Sunanihi wa Ayyamihi. He included therein what he considered sahih ahadith. He would select ahadith through intense scrutiny, as mentioned above, and he would select the most thiqah and dabit (accurate) narrators. If he narrated from a prolific sheikh, he would select the narration through his most thiqah and dabit students. The famous example of that in the books that discussed the condition of al Bukhari, is his narration from the most thiqah students of al Zuhri (d. 124 AH). The scholars divided the narrators from al Zuhri into five classes:

The first class: Those that combined memorisation and mastery, long companionship with al Zuhri, knowledge of his ahadith, and accuracy in it, such as Malik, Ibn ‘Uyaynah, ‘Ubayd Allah ibn Umar, Ma’mar, Yunus, ‘Aqil, Shu’ayb, etc. These are the target of al Bukhari and they are according to his condition in al Sahih, and similarly, Muslim.^[58]

The second class: Those who possessed memory and mastery, but they did not accompany al Zuhri for long. They accompanied him for a short period only and did not gain expertise in his ahadith. In their mastery, they were below the first class, such as al Awza’i, al Layth, ‘Abdul Rahman ibn Khalid ibn Musafir, al No’man ibn Rashid, etc. Muslim narrates from these narrators, from al Zuhri. Sometimes al Bukhari may narrate those ahadith from them, which he trusted, but he does not narrate all of them. Mostly, al Bukhari narrates the ahadith of the second class ta’liqan (in his comments).^[59]

The third class: They who were attached to al Zuhri, accompanied him and narrated from him, but were criticised due to their memory, such as Sufyan ibn Hussain, Muhammad ibn Ishaq, Salih ibn Abi al Akhdar, Zama’ah ibn Salih etc. Abu Dawood, al Tirmidhi and al Nasa’i narrated from them. Sometimes Muslim narrated from some of them as mutabi’ (as a corroboration for another narration). Very seldom, al Bukhari narrated a few ahadith of the third class ta’liqan,^[60] but he did not narrate anything from them in the actual book, nor did he narrate much from them.^[61]

The fourth class: Those who narrated from al Zuhri, without being attached to him or having long companionship and in addition to that they were criticised, such as Ishaq ibn Yahya al Kalbi, Muawiyah ibn Yahya al Sadafi, Ishaq ibn Abi Farwah, Ibrahim ibn Yazid al Makki, al Muthanna ibn al Sabah and others like them. Sometimes, al Tirmidhi narrated from some of them.^[62]

The fifth class: These are a group of matruk (abandoned) and majhul (unknown) narrators, such as al Hakam al Ayli, ‘Abdul Quddus ibn Habib, Muhammad ibn Sa’id al Maslub and Bahr al Saqqa’ etc. Al Tirmidhi, Abu Dawood and al Nasa’i did not narrate from them. Ibn Majah narrated from some of them; as a result, the status of his book dropped lower than the rest of the books. Only a group of later scholars considered it among the reliable books.^[63]

Al Bukhari and Muslim do not narrate from the narrators of the fourth and fifth classes. Through these classes, the method utilised by al Bukhari is distinguished and superior to that of Muslim, and thus they are superior to the rest of the six books.

All of that which has been mentioned, is pertaining to the famous narrators who narrated Hadith frequently, such as al Zuhri, Nafi’, al A’mash, Qatadah, and others. As for those who did not narrate frequently, Sheikhayn, when narrating their ahadith, relied on thiqah, ‘adalah, and lack of mistakes. Some of them were strongly relied upon; hence, they narrated their isolated narrations also, such as Yahya ibn Sa’id al Ansari, whilst others were not strongly relied upon, so they narrated those narrations for him where others corroborated with him, which is the majority.^[64]

The last text of Ibn Hajar indicates that al Bukhari, at times, narrates from some narrators (who were not well-known, famous, and frequent narrators) who he did not rely on strongly. In fact, he narrates from some narrators who were criticised and sometimes he himself declared them da’if in another book. How can the hadith be sahih if it contains a da’if or a criticised narrator?

The key point in understanding this issue is completely related to the theory that states that the trustworthiness of the narrator does not mean that all of his ahadith are sahih, and the weakness of the narrator does not mean that all of his ahadith are da’if, that must be discarded. A thiqah narrator may err at times and a da’if narrator may be correct and be accurate when narrating some ahadith. This means dealing precisely with every hadith, regardless of the mere appearance of the isnad. Al Bukhari himself narrating from those whom he deemed da’if and then narrating from them in al Sahih shows that he was aware of their condition and the problems of their ahadith. This shows that he wrote his book while being completely aware of the problems related to that narrator. Despite this, he narrated his Hadith and included it in his book,^[65] which shows an accurate historical methodology, as the condition of the narrator was not the centre of the science of Hadith criticism. The centre was to confirm the hadith in itself through the accurate historical methodology. Hence, al Bukhari called his book al Sahih and did not precondition the trustworthiness of all the narrators, but rather preconditioned authenticity.

Imam al Kashmiri emphasised this ideology in an important text, while discussing Ismail ibn Abi Uways, who is one of al Bukhari’s teacher who was declared da’if and accused.^[66] He said:

 

واعلم أنه قد يذهب إلى بعض الأوهام أن المحدثين إذا أخذوا الأحاديث عمن رموا بالكذب أيضا ارتفع الأمان عن الأحاديث ولماذا بقي الاعتماد عليها قلت وذلك باطل قطعا فإن الحديث إذا صار فنا مستقلا ولم يبق للأساتذة والشيوخ مدخل فيه كيف يورث ذلك خلطا أو خبطا نعم لو كان ذلك إذا كان الحديث يكتب شيئا فشيئا لأدى ذلك إلى تخليط ولكن الذين دونوا الحديث لم يكتفوا بطريق واحد حتى مارسوه بطرق متعددة وتتبعوه عن مشايخ متفرقة حتى تبين لهم صدقه من كذبه كفلق الصبح فهؤلاء كانوا يعرفون محاله ومظانه فإذا جمعوا الطرق والأسانيد انكشفت لهم العلل وأسباب الجرح كلها فلم يدونوه إلا بعد ما حققوه ومارسوه وبعد هذا البحث والفحص لو اشتمل حديث على أمر قادح لم يقتض ذلك قدحا في نفس الأحاديث أصلا فإنه مخرجه معلوم ورواته معروفون وأمره مكشوف والجرح فيه مذكور فأي تخليط هذا ولذا قال سفيان الثوري لا تأخذوا الأحاديث عن جابر الجعفي ثم روى عنه بنفسه ولما سئل عنه قال إني أعرف صدقه من كذبه فدل على أنه لا تخليط على الممارس لأن الحديث عنده يكون معلوما بمخارجه ورواته وعلله…

وبالجملة السلف إنما أخذوا الحديث عمن يوثق بهم ويعتمد على حفظهم ودينهم فلما انتقل الحديث من الصدور إلى الزبر والأسفار فحينئذ لو أخذ عمن رمي بالكذب لم يقدح بشيء لأن عندك علما بالاختلاط والتمييز معا فسفيان الثوري كان يعرف الأحاديث فإذا أخذها عن جابر ميز جيدها عن رديئها صحيحها من سقيمها فهذه مرحلة بعد التدوين ولا تخليط بعده أصلا وإنما التخليط على من لم يميز بين زمن التدوين وبعده

Know well that some people may be under the illusion that if the Muhaddithin took ahadith from those who were accused of lying also, then the safety of the ahadith would be lifted. Then why should one continue to rely on them?

I say: This is completely false, because when Hadith became an independent field and the teachers and sheikhs no longer have any role in it, how would that lead to confusion or uproar? Yes, if that was the case when the Hadith was written bit by bit, then it would lead to confusion. However, those who recorded Hadith did not suffice with one path, rather they pursued it in several paths and tracked it from different sheikhs, until they could distinguish the truth from lies, like the break of dawn. These people knew its locations and sources. Thus, when they collected the paths and the isnad, the defects and all the reasons for the criticism became exposed to them. They did not record it except after they had verified and pursued it. After this research and screening, if anything objectionable is found in a hadith, that would not necessitate criticism of the ahadith themselves, at all, because its source is known, its narrators are well-known, its matter is clear, and the criticism of it is mentioned. Then, what kind of confusion is this?

That is why Sufyan al Thawri said, “Do not take ahadith from Jabir al Ju’fi.” Then he, himself narrated from him. When he was asked about it, he said, “I know his truth from his lies.” This indicates that there is no confusion on the expert, because the Hadith’s sources, narrators, and its ‘Ilal (defects), according to him, are known.

In brief, the predecessors only took Hadith from those who were trustworthy and their memory and religiosity were relied upon. Thus, when Hadith moved from the bosoms to the books and scripts, then if it were taken from someone who was accused of lying, it would not be considered a criticism at all, because you have knowledge of the confusion as well as the distinction. Sufyan al Thawri knew the ahadith. When he took them from Jabir, he could distinguish the good from the bad and the sahih from the da’if. This is a stage after tadwin, and there is no confusion after it at all. Confusion is only on the one who did not distinguish between the time of tadwin and after it.^[67]

 

The theory of ‘selection’ from the ahadith of a criticised narrator is one of the most important things that explain this action of al Bukhari. Al Bukhari would, at times, select from the ahadith of some da’if narrators that which he found to be authentic and accurate and he would neglect some ahadith of thiqah narrators in which he found an error. The matter in all of this revolves around the evidence. Where there is evidence that it is an error, it will remain such, even if it was narrated by a thiqah Imam. Likewise, when there is evidence that it is correct, it will remain such, even if it was narrated by a da’if narrator. Critics look at each hadith separately and pass judgement on it appropriately.

In this selection, al Bukhari utilises his vast knowledge of ahadith and narrators and extensive criticism that he inherited from the Imams of criticism. It is established that Ibn Ma’in would make tawthiq of some narrators concerning some sheikhs and make their tad’if in others, or make tawthiq of some of them in some countries and make their tad’if in others, or in some topics or at some times.

In any case, several matters explain al Bukhari’s narration from da’if narrators in his al Sahih:

First: He did not precondition the thiqah (trustworthiness) of the narrators, but rather preconditioned sihhah (authenticity). This is clear from the title of his book, as he did not mention in it that he narrates sahih ahadith through thiqah narrators. Accordingly, he guaranteed the authenticity of the Hadith and did not guarantee the trustworthiness of every narrator in al Sahih. He only guaranteed the accuracy of the narrated Hadith. Authenticity may come through a da’if narrator if he is supported and endorsed by factors that show that he is accurate and he mastered it, such as the existence of mutaba’at^[68] or shawahid^[69] for it.

Second: At times, al Bukhari did not accept the critics’ statements about the narrator. ‘Ikrimah, the freed slave of Ibn ‘Abbas, can be used as an example of this.^[70]

Third: Al Bukhari may believe that the weakness in a narrator is specific to his narration from so-and-so among his sheikhs, or to the narration of so-and-so from him, or to what he heard from him without his book, or to what he heard from him after ikhtilat.^[71] Thus, he will narrate from the narrator where he is suitable and will not narrate anything other than that. The Imams have announced this method. Hafiz Ibn ‘Abdul Hadi (d. 744 AH) said:

 

واعلم أن كثيرا ما يروي أصحاب الصحيح حديث الرجل عن شيخ معين لخصوصيته به ومعرفته بحديثه وضبطه له ولا يخرجون حديثه عن غيره لكونه غير مشهور بالرواية عنه ولا معروف بضبط حديثه أو لغير ذلك فيجيء من لا تحقيق عنده فيرى ذلك الرجل المخرج له في الصحيح قد روى حديثا عمن خرج له في الصحيح من غير طريق ذلك الرجل فيقول هذا على شرط الشيخين أو على شرط البخاري أو على شرط مسلم لأنهم احتجا بذلك الرجل في الجملة وهذا فيه نوع تساهل فإن صاحبي الصحيح لم يحتجا به إلا في شيخ معين لا في غيره فلا يكون على شرطهما

Know well that the authors of sahih books often narrate a person’s Hadith from a specific sheikh due to his speciality regarding him, knowledge of his Hadith, and his accuracy in it. They do not narrate his Hadith from someone else because he is not famous for narrating from him, nor is he known for his accuracy in his Hadith, or for some other reason. Then someone who does not have any research comes and sees that this person is such that his Hadith is narrated in the al Sahih. He then narrates a hadith from someone whose narrations are in the al Sahih, but from a chain different to that person’s, and he says that this is according to the condition of Sheikhayn, or according to the condition of al Bukhari, or according to the condition of Muslim, because they inferred from that man in general. This is a kind of leniency, because the two authors of the al Sahih did not infer through him except from a specific sheikh, not anyone else. Thus, it is not according to their conditions.^[72]

 

The Third Feature: Hidden hints in al Sahih

Al Bukhari utilises hints abundantly in his book. Al Bukhari was a man of hints, not a man of expression. Al Mu’allimi al Yamani (d. 1386 AH) said:

 

وللبخاري ولوع بالاجتزاء بالتلويح عن التصريح كما جرى عليه في مواضع من جامعه الصحيح

Al Bukhari was infatuated with being content with hints rather than explicitness, as he did in places in his al Jami’ al Sahih.^[73]

 

These hints were a source of the scholars’ admiration of his book and a source of lengthy discussions about it. Ibn al Munir (d. 683 AH) said:

 

كان البخاري لطيف الأخذ لفوائد الحديث دقيق الفكرة فيها وكان ربما عرض له الاستدلال على الترجمة بالحديث الواضح المطابق فعدل إلى الأخذ من الإشارة والرمز به وكان على الصواب في ذلك لأن الحديث البين يستوي الناس في الأخذ منه وإنما يتفاوتون في الاستنباط من الإشارات الخفية ولم يكن مقصود البخاري كغيره يملأ الصحف بما سبق إليه وبما يعتمد في مثله على الأفهام العامة وإنما كان مقصده فائدة زائدة

Al Bukhari was subtle in deriving benefits of the Hadith and had an accurate idea about it. Sometimes, the evidence for the title (of the chapter) was available to him, through a clear matching hadith; however, he resorted to deducing from the hints and indications in it. He was correct in doing so, because people are equal in deducing from the clear Hadith. They only differ in deducing from the hidden hints. Al Bukhari’s intention was not like others, to fill the pages with that which preceded him and what general minds can rely on, but rather his objective was additional benefits.^[74]

 

The hints in Sahih al Bukhari are varied:

Among them are his hints in the titles of the chapters of al Sahih, and they are many. They contain Fiqhi, Hadith, critical and linguistic hints. Hafiz Ibn Hajar (d. 852 AH) explained al Bukhari’s practice in the title of the first hadith:

 

فاكتفى بالتلويح عن التصريح وقد سلك هذه الطريقة في معظم تراجم هذا الكتاب على ما سيظهر بالاستقراء

He sufficed with hints rather than explicitness. He followed this method in most of the titles of this book, as will become evident by exploration.^[75]

 

Al Hafiz al Qastallani (d. 923 AH) said:

وبالجملة فتراجمه حيرت الأفكار وأدهشت العقول والأبصارولقد أجاد القائل

In brief, his titles confused the thoughts and baffled the minds and eyes. Someone very aptly said:

أبداه في الأبواب من أسرار

أعيا فحول العلم حلُّ رموز ما

The masters of knowledge have become exhausted from solving the symbols of the secrets he expressed in the chapters.^[76]

 

Among them are hints of narrating abundantly from some sheikhs and not others. Al Bukhari did not narrate from Ahmed ibn Hanbal in his al Sahih except two or three ahadith,^[77] even though he heard from him. However, since his ahadith were well-known, famous and widespread, he preferred narrating from others to obtain new benefits and not to repeat what was well-known and famous. The same can be said about al Bukhari not narrating a lot from Qutaybah ibn Sa’id (d. 240 AH), as Qutaybah’s ahadith were well-known and famous, so no great new benefit would be obtained in narrating from him. Al Bukhari’s habit was not to mention anything except for a benefit.^[78]

Among these are hints to a ‘illah (defect) in the ahadith. He would hint through the titles and thereafter mentioning the ahadith to a ‘illah of a specific hadith. From amongst that is that he would set up a chapter through the title of a hadith and then not mention it. An example is his saying:

 

باب قول النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم الدين النصيحة له ولرسوله ولأئمة المسلمين وعامتهم وقوله تعالى إِذَا نَصَحُوا لِلهِ وَرَسُوْلِهِ

Chapter on the saying of the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, “Din is well-wishing to Allah, His Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, the leaders of the Muslims and their masses,” and the saying of Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala “as long as they are true to Allah and His Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam.^[79]”

 

Thereafter, he mentioned two ahadith under this chapter, which are not of the same wording. The first is the hadith of Jarir ibn ‘Abdullah radiya Llahu ‘anhu, wherein he said:

 

بايعت رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم على إقام الصلاة وإيتاء الزكاة والنصح لكل مسلم

I pledged allegiance to the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, to establish Salah, pay Zakat, and wish well for every Muslim.^[80]

 

He mentioned the second hadith with a similar meaning from the hadith of Jarir radiya Llahu ‘anhu as well.

Scholars and critics have tracked this hint, which is that al Bukhari mentioned the hadith:

 

الدين النصيحة

Din is well wishing.

 

in the title of the chapter and did not mention it with the ahadith that were narrated with their isnad, despite the fact that it is a well-known and famous hadith. Mentioning it would be more appropriate because of its clear relevance to the chapter. Their tracking concluded that al Bukhari abstained from mentioning the hadith, “Din is well wishing,” because the narrator of this hadith—through the chain of Tamim al Dari, which is the most famous chain—is Suhayl ibn Abi Salih, and Suhayl does not meet al Bukhari’s conditions,^[81] as mentioned by Imam al Khattabi (d. 388 AH), the first commentator of Sahih al Bukhari. Hafiz Ibn Hajar followed him and said:

 

هذا الحديث أورده المصنف هنا ترجمة باب ولم يخرجه مسندا في هذا الكتاب لكونه على غير شرطه ونبه بإيراده على صلاحيته في الجملة وما أورده من الآية وحديث جرير يشتمل على ما تضمنه فالحديث قوي عموما لكنه ليس على الشرط العالي الذي وضعه البخاري لأحاديث صحيحه والسبب في ذلك راويه سهيل بن أبي صالح فليس الحديث ضعيفا عند البخاري و لم يترك ذكره لأنه عنده من الواهي بل ليفهم من اطلع عليه أن فيه علة منعته من إسناده وله من ذلك في كتابه كثير يقف عليه من له تمييز كما يقول الإمام العيني

The author mentioned this hadith here as a title of the chapter and he did not narrate it with its isnad in this book, because it did not meet his conditions. By mentioning it, he indicated to its soundness in general. The verse and the hadith of Jarir that he mentioned, includes the meaning it contains.^[82] The hadith is strong in general; however, it does not meet the high condition that al Bukhari set for the ahadith of his al Sahih. The reason for that is its narrator Suhayl ibn Abi Salih. Thus, the hadith is not da’if according to al Bukhari and he did not refrain from mentioning it because he considered it weak, rather, so that anyone who looks at it understands that there is an ‘illah in it, which prevented him from narrating it with isnad. He does this many times in his book. Anyone who possesses discernment will be aware of it, as mentioned by Imam al ‘Ayni.^[83]

 

In al Tarikh al Kabir, al Bukhari mentioned some of the narrations of the hadith: “Din is well wishing,” and showed the difference in its isnad, from which, one can understand the reason for not narrating it in al Sahih.^[84]

Some researchers paid attention to the many hints in the titles and thus studies have increased in this field.^[85]

Among that are important hints in explaining some words and narrations in such a delicate manner that only those who have pursued the science of ‘Ilal al Hadith for a long time and have mastered its art can notice. At times, al Bukhari omits a narrator, indicates to him, and presents the hadith with his wording. At times, he omits an error from the isnad or the text to show that it is a mistake, or he narrates a hadith that has an ‘illah in a chapter other than its relevant one, or he narrates a hadith that has an ‘illah for benefits and additions that are not found in other narrations, etc. This has been detailed in a brilliant modern study, which is the study of Dr. Sa’id Bashanfar entitled Manhaj al Imam al Bukhari fi ‘Ard al Hadith al Ma’lul fi al Jami’ al Sahih (Imam al Bukhari’s methodology in presenting the defective Hadith in al Jami’ al Sahih). It contains many important examples.^[86]

All of these hints were a clear feature that distinguished al Sahih, which made scholars compete with each other in solving them, explaining their aims, and extracting many benefits from them. This means that al Bukhari did not compile his book using those indications and hints, intending young students. Rather, he addressed it to the senior critics of Hadith in his time. This issue was not understood by some intellectuals in our time, so the matter led from the solidity of al Bukhari’s message in the hints and ‘ilal in his book, to the dissolving modern reception in our time, which resulted in widespread chaos in dealing with al Sahih. Details of that come in the conclusion.

 

4. Between objectivity and subjectivity in the tasnif of al Sahih

Al Bukhari compiled his al Sahih, paying great attention to the authenticity of the ahadith in it. However, the question is; to what extent was the selection of ahadith in it in accordance to al Bukhari’s subjectivity and ideology? Did al Bukhari conceal sahih ahadith that did not conform to his opinion? Did he authenticate ahadith that suited his ideology?

Similar is the case of the narrators. Did al Bukhari ignore thiqah narrators for ideological reasons and narrate from da’if narrators and make their tawthiq for subjective reasons?

This issue is one of the problematic issues of our time, which deserves extensive and deep research. However, I will suffice, here, on one aspect only, which is the political doctrinal aspect. The clearest issue that becomes apparent in this aspect is al Bukhari’s relationship with the political authority of his time and with its oppositions. The political authority of his time was the Abbasid Caliphate, and the most important opposition of that Caliphate were the Ahlul Bayt and those who supported them. Thus, studying al Bukhari in terms of his relationship with the Abbasids and in terms of his relationship with the Shia and the Ahlul Bayt gives a mini picture of his ideology and his subjectivity or objectivity. Research into this issue still needs extensive studies.

I have detailed this relationship in another study entitled Ishkaliyyat Ta’mim al Surah al Juz’iyyah Dirasah fi ‘Alaqat al Bukhari bi al Sultah al Siyasiyyah Min Khilal Riwayat Fada’il ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib fi al Sahih^[87] (The Problem of Generalising the Partial Image: A Study of al Bukhari’s Relationship with the Political Authority through Narrations of the Merits of ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib in al Sahih). I structured it on the theory of abstract possibilities. Therefore, I mentioned three possibilities regarding the relationship between al Bukhari and the political authority:

The first: Al Bukhari was in the service of the Abbasid authority and he was under their shadow and under their control.

The second: He was working against their authority and believed in supporting their opposition.

The third: He had no relationship with the political authority, neither serving nor opposing them, but rather he was an independent scholar far from political issues.

I studied these possibilities independently and did not find anything to support the first possibility, which is that al Bukhari was close to the political authority or serving it, nor anything to support the second possibility. Only the third possibility remained, which is what al Bukhari’s life and texts indicate. Here, I will summarise, from that research, which shows that the first possibility is not possible and I will suffice on it. Hence, I say:

There is no evidence at all that al Bukhari was close to the Abbasid political authority; flattering it and serving it, neither in terms of what historians mention in his biography nor in terms of the texts of his books.

As for what historians mention in his biography, it is mentioned that his relationship with the rulers was a tense relationship, not a cooperative relationship. Historians mentioned that the leader, Khalid ibn Ahmed al Dhuhali, the governor of Bukhara, sent a message to al Bukhari stating:

 

أن احمل إلي كتاب الجامع والتاريخ وغيرهما لأسمع منك

Bring the book al Jami’ and al Tarikh and others to me so that I may hear them from you.

 

Al Bukhari responded with a stern answer that indicates to his obstinacy in cooperating with the authority at that time. He said:

 

أنا لا أذل العلم ولا أحمله إلى أبواب الناس فإن كانت لك إلى شيء منه حاجة فاحضرني في مسجدي أو في داري وإن لم يعجبك هذا فأنت سلطان فامنعني من المجلس ليكون لي عذر عند الله يوم القيامة لأني لا أكتم العلم لقول النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم من‏ سئل عن علم فكتمه ألجم بلجام من نار

I do not humiliate knowledge nor do I carry it to the doors of the people. If you have a need for any of it, come to my Masjid or to my house. If this does not please you, then you are a leader. Prevent me from holding gatherings so that I may have an excuse by Allah on the Day of Qiyamah, because I do not conceal knowledge, as the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam said, “Whoever is asked about knowledge and he conceals it, he will be bridled with a bridle of fire.”

 

This strong answer was the reason for the estrangement between them. Some other detailed narrations mention that this was the reason for the uproar against al Bukhari in Bukhara, which forced him to leave. He was arrested after a short while outside Bukhara.^[88]

As for the texts of his books, I focused my research on the book of merits in Sahih al Bukhari, which is one of the most important books through which one can ascertain the political and doctrinal alignment of the author, as many of the deliberations about the Caliphate and the revolts against him were based on the ahadith of merits. I mentioned three possibilities:

• Did al Bukhari mention anything about the merits of the Abbasids or indicate to their rule and kingdom that supports their legitimacy?
• Did al Bukhari mention anything in condemnation of those who opposed them and rebelled against them or indicate to any type of criticism towards them, which also supports them and establishes their authority? The most important opposition in the chapter of leadership are the Shia.
• Did al Bukhari remain silent about ahadith that existed in his time pertaining to the virtues of the opposition, which he could have narrated, or did he ignore narrators from amongst the senior Imams of the Ahlul Bayt and not narrate from them?

As for the first, I did not find al Bukhari narrating ahadith about the merits of the Abbasids or the Banu al ‘Abbas, or al ‘Abbas ibn ‘Abdul Muttalib himself,^[89] despite the fact that those ahadith were famous and well-known in his time. Imam Ahmed narrated a large number of them. Some of al Bukhari’s students, such as al Tirmidhi and others, narrated them.

It was easy for al Bukhari to quote those ahadith in his book and claim their authenticity; however, they did not meet his conditions, so he ignored them all.

In fact, he clearly made tad’if of some ahadith that explicitly mention the merits of the Banu al ‘Abbas. Among them is the hadith Imam Ahmed narrated in his al Musnad from ‘Ubayd ibn Abi Qurrah, who said:

 

حدثنا ليث بن سعد عن أبي قبيل عن أبي ميسرة عن العباس قال كنت عند النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم ذات ليلة فقال انظر هل ترى في السماء من نجم قال قلت نعم قال ما ترى قال قلت أرى الثريا قال أما إنه يلي هذه الأمة بعددها من صلبك اثنين في فتنة

Layth ibn Sa’d narrated to us — from Abu Qabil — from Abu Maisarah — from al ‘Abbas radiya Llahu ‘anhu, who said, “I was with the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam one night, and he said, “Look, do you see a star in the sky?”

I said, “Yes.”

He asked, “What do you see?”

I said, “I see Thurayya (Pleiades).”

He said, “Indeed, as many as it (Thurayya) of your descendants will rule this Ummah; two during strife.”^[90]

 

This is a clear hadith in support of the Abbasid state. This hadith definitely reached al Bukhari. He could have narrated it in al Sahih and gained proximity to the Abbasids through it, but what happened was the opposite of that. He mentioned it in his al Tarikh al Kabir and indicated to an ‘illah in it with a hidden hint, as was his habit, saying:

 

عبيد بن أبي قرة سمع الليث قال عبد الله بن محمد الجعفي لقيته بالبصرة وهو بغدادي في قصة العباس لا يتابع في حديثه

‘Ubayd ibn Abi Qurrah heard from al Layth. ‘Abdullah ibn Muhammad al Ju’fi says that he met him in Basrah and he was from Baghdad in the incident of al ‘Abbas. He has no mutabi’ in his hadith.^[91]

 

This is an ‘illah of the hadith, as the people of Hadith criticism know. Thus, instead of supporting them even in one hadith, we find him criticising that hadith and declaring it da’if.

Al Bukhari also ignored the ahadith of the ‘black flags’. They are ahadith that refer to the Abbasid Caliphate, but they are criticised as da’if. Hence, he ignored them even though some of his sheikhs narrated them in their well-known books, such as Nuaim ibn Hammad (d. 228 AH)^[92], Ibn Abi Shaybah (d. 235 AH)^[93], and Ahmed ibn Hanbal (d. 241 AH).^[94]

He could have utilised his titles (of the chapters) for the merits of al ‘Abbas or the black flags, or gotten closer to the Abbasids through one of the titles, but none of that happened.

Based on all of that, it is not possible to say that al Bukhari intended to get closer to the Abbasids here, nor that he was working for the benefit of their state, at least in the book of merits.

As for the second possibility, which is, did al Bukhari mention anything in condemnation of those who opposed them and rebelled against them or indicate to any type of criticism towards them, which also supports them and establishes their authority? The most important opposition in the chapter of leadership are the Shia.

By this, I mean that al Bukhari intended to get closer to the Abbasids by criticising the ‘Alawis, the progeny of ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib radiya Llahu ‘anhu, as the ‘Alawis were the main strong rivals to the Abbasids for the Caliphate. They regarded themselves more deserving of it than them. They staged strong revolts against the Abbasids. Perhaps the strongest revolt that faced the Abbasids at the beginning of their rule was the revolt of Muhammad ibn ‘Abdullah ibn al Hassan ibn al Hassan—al Nafs al Zakiyyah—in 145 AH. He saw himself as more deserving of the Caliphate than al Mansur, so he refused to pledge allegiance to him and revolted against him in conjunction with his brother Ibrahim; however, it ended in failure. Thereafter came the Battle of Fakh in 169 AH,^[95] led by al Hussain ibn ‘Ali ibn al Hassan ibn al Hassan ibn al Hassan ibn ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib, which also failed. Several revolts from the ‘Alawis followed thereafter, but they all failed. This prompted Abu al Faraj al Asbahani to write his book—Maqatil al Talibiyyin—to pen details on those events. The relationship between the Abbasids and the ‘Alawis was not a pure, friendly relationship, although it was filled by some serenity during the time of al Ma’mun when he appointed ‘Ali ibn Musa al Rida as the heir apparent due to him having slight Shia sympathies, but he passed away soon after that, so the Caliphate remained with the Abbasids.

For all these reasons, if al Bukhari intended to get closer to the Abbasids, he would have either condemned the ‘Alawis or remained silent about their virtues and merits. However, the reality in his al Sahih was the opposite of that. Al Bukhari abundantly mentioned the merits of ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib, al Hassan, al Hussain, and Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anhum in his al Sahih. He created a chapter entitled ‘chapter on the merits of ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib al Qurashi al Hashimi, Abu al Hassan radiya Llahu ‘anhu’, and narrated seven marfu’ muttasil ahadith and two mu’allaq ahadith in it.^[96] Then he created a chapter on the merits of Jafar ibn Abi Talib and narrated two ahadith in it.^[97] Then he moved on to the merits of Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha, the daughter of the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, and narrated six ahadith in it.^[98] After several chapters, he created a chapter on the merits of al Hassan and al Hussain radiya Llahu ‘anhuma and narrated eight ahadith in it.^[99] This amounts to the most chapters and the most ahadith on the merits of one family in the entire al Sahih, in addition to other ahadith on the merits of ‘Ali and the Ahlul Bayt that he narrated scattered in other places in al Sahih.^[100]

The Shia use some of those ahadith that al Bukhari narrated as evidence for their school, as if they assist their idea in a way, such as the hadith in which the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam says to ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu:

 

أما‏ ترضى أن تكون مني بمنزلة هارون من موسى

Are you not satisfied to be to me as Harun was to Musa?^[101]

 

And the hadith:

 

أنت مني وأنا منك

You are from me and I am from you.^[102]

 

And the hadith:

 

لأعطين الراية غدا رجلا يحبه الله ورسوله يفتح الله على يديه

Tomorrow I will definitely give the flag to a man whom Allah and His Prophet love, and Allah will grant victory on his hands.^[103]

 

Some authors of the books of other sects have mentioned that the Shia use the hadith of manzilah as evidence for the Caliphate of ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu and his right to it.^[104]

Furthermore, al Bukhari did not stop there. In fact, he narrated a hadith in his al Sahih that discusses the Abbasid rule, which is the hadith of the twelve khalifas,^[105] and (he narrated) other ahadith that the Shia use as evidence for some of their beliefs, such as the hadith of Raziyyah.^[106] In fact, when al Bukhari mentions Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha, he usually followed her name with the words ‘‘Alayha al Salam’ (peace be upon her). At times, he did that with ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu and the Ahlul Bayt.^[107] He narrated from some of the well-known and famous Shia; some of them were extreme in Shi’ism.^[108] He did not mention anything that would disparage the status of the Ahlul Bayt in the whole book.

All of this shows that al Bukhari did not flatter the Abbasids on their stance with the ‘Alawis.

As for the third possibility, which is did al Bukhari remain silent about ahadith that existed in his time pertaining to the virtues of the opposition, which he could have narrated, or did he ignore narrators from amongst the senior Imams of the Ahlul Bayt and not narrate from them?

This is a silent proof which cannot be relied upon in front of the clear texts previously mentioned regarding his stance on the Ahlul Bayt and the descendants of ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu. Despite that, the question can be posed: Did al Bukhari intentionally conceal ahadith pertaining to the merits of the Ahlul Bayt, which he could have narrated, or did al Bukhari ignore some of the Imams of the Ahlul Bayt and not narrate from them for political or doctrinal purposes?

This can be studied from two points of view:

The first: His abstention from narrating famous ahadith regarding the merits of ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu, such as the hadith, ‘Whoever’s mawla I am, ‘Ali is also his mawla.’

The second: His abstention from narrating from senior Imams of the Ahlul Bayt such as Jafar al Sadiq.

As for the first point of view, perhaps the most famous hadith that al Bukhari did not narrate pertaining to the virtues of ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu is the hadith, ‘Whoever’s mawla I am, ‘Ali is also his mawla.’ It is widely spread in the compiled books of Hadith, and al Dhahabi and Ibn Kathir declared it sahih.^[109]

Ibn Hajar said:

 

وأما حديث من‏ كنت مولاه فعلي مولاه فقد أخرجه الترمذي والنسائي وهو كثير الطرق جدا وقد استوعبها ابن عقدة في كتاب مفرد وكثير من أسانيدها صحاح وحسان

As for the hadith: ‘Whoever’s mawla I am, ‘Ali is also his mawla’, it is narrated by al Tirmidhi and al Nasa’i. It has many chains. Ibn ‘Uqdah gathered them in a single book. Many of its chains are sahih and hassan.^[110]

 

However, al Bukhari abstained from narrating it. This could be due to several possibilities:

First: Al Bukhari abstained from narrating those ahadith for political purposes.

Second: He refrained from it for critical purposes.

Third: He abstained because he wrote a brief book, as he called it. Thus, he did not intend to include everything that was proven to him, but he narrated what was sufficient in his al Sahih and sufficed on that.

These are existing possibilities, which need to be studied and detailed, while being certain that we do not attribute any statement to a silent person. Thus, it cannot be said with certainty that this is the mazhab of al Bukhari, but we try to get as close as we can to understanding al Bukhari’s methodology, otherwise the principle is that declarations are considered, not silence.

As for the first possibility, it is weak in the face of what we have previously mentioned about the many ahadith that he narrated pertaining to the merits of the Ahlul Bayt in general, as well as some ahadith that are more in the ‘Alawis favour than others. Therefore, if the abstention here was for political purposes, al Bukhari would not have narrated, at all, those ahadith that support the ‘Alawis and indicate that they are more deserving of leadership than the Abbasids, and other things that I have previously mentioned.

If this possibility was valid, then his silence regarding some ahadith on the merits of ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu must be matched with his silence about all the ahadith on the merits of the Abbasids and all the ahadith on the merits of Muawiyah radiya Llahu ‘anhu. What is said there must be said here.

This political explanation of that small subsidiary issue, with the existence of all these possibilities, and turning away from the overall picture that Imam al Bukhari draws in his al Sahih regarding the Ahlul Bayt and their Imams, and about his relationship with his Shia sheikhs, by focusing on that silence to deduce from it another overall picture that is contrary to the first picture, with the possibility of explaining that subsidiary evidence clearly under that general view and overall picture, indicates to an unsystematic selectivity that is far from objective scholarly research, especially with the existence of other possibilities that can explain this small subsidiary issue.

In any case, the grading of the hadith and knowledge of its isnad indicates that the reason for al Bukhari’s abstention from narrating it is a critical reason, unrelated to authority or any mazhab. This is because I assume that the reason is that al Bukhari does not regard the hadith to be sahih with a single sanad that can be relied upon, to include it in his al Sahih. At times, a hadith may have been established according to him due to the collection of its chains; however, he may not see the isnad to be strong according to his condition, which he can use as evidence in his al Sahih, in an important hadith like this hadith. Hence, he abstained from it, especially since the source of this hadith and its spread was from Kufah and most of its narrators are from the Shia; and it is the main hadith in support of the ideology of Shi’ism. The narration of the innovator that supports his innovation is subject to consideration, scrutiny, and severity by many critics. I have detailed the isnad and the narrations in a study, so refer to it.^[111]

Confirming these critical purposes, that al Bukhari is familiar with the narrations of the hadith: ‘Whoever’s mawla I am’, and despite that, he criticised some of their isnad in his al Tarikh al Kabir, purely from a critical point of view, not from the text. He criticised Ismail ibn Nashit al ‘Amiri narrating this hadith from Jamil ibn ‘Amir, that Salim narrated to him that he heard someone who heard the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam say on the day of Ghadir Khumm, “Whoever’s mawla I am, ‘Ali is also his mawla.” with his saying:

 

وفي إسناده نظر

There is a problem with its isnad.^[112]

 

In another place, he criticised Sahm ibn Hussain al Asadi’s narration of this hadith from Abu Sa’id al Khudri radiya Llahu ‘anhu, by saying:

 

وسهم‏ مجهول ولا يدرى

Sahm is unknown and cannot be found.^[113]

 

It is noticeable in all of this that he did not address the text, but rather looked at the isnad, although he does make ta’lil (point out defects) of some da’if texts in al Tarikh al Kabir.^[114]

The view is a purely a critical view and has nothing to do with politics. Otherwise, the hadith of ‘status,’ where the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam said to ‘Ali:

 

أنت مني بمنزلة هارون من موسى

You are to me as Harun was to Musa.

 

is no less important than this hadith, whereas al Bukhari narrated it in two places.

After all of this, the third possibility remains, which is that al Bukhari did not narrate it because other narrations were sufficient for him, as he did not stipulate that he would narrate all the sahih ahadith. However, I exclude this possibility, due to the importance of this hadith, in my opinion, and it being more deserving than others in merits, if it is sahih according to al Bukhari. The statement of some Imams in explaining what al Bukhari did not narrate, has some relevance in my opinion, as the hadith is important and essential in its chapter.^[115]

As for the second issue, which is that al Bukhari abstained from narrating from Jafar al Sadiq, I discussed it in a lengthy research under the title Asbab ‘Udul al Imam al Bukhari ‘an al Takhrij li al Imam Jafar al Sadiq fi Sahihihi. (Reasons for Imam al Bukhari’s Abstention from Narrating from Imam Jafar al Sadiq in his al Sahih). I discussed it according to the method of possibilities as well. I reveal that the possibility of al Bukhari abstaining from the narrations of al Sadiq for doctrinal and political reasons is not valid, and the strong possibility is that he abstained from him for critical hadith issues that are not related to elevation of isnad or the existence of a sahih sanad between al Bukhari and al Sadiq. Rather, it was related to al Sadiq’s scholarly specialisation and preoccupation with Fiqh, not accuracy of isnad and scrutinising them. Hence, some problems relating to isnad are found in his hadith, as I detailed in the study.

Here, I will summarise from that study, the reasons for the invalidity of the possibility of al Bukhari abstaining from al Sadiq’s narrations for doctrinal purposes. In my opinion, there are four reasons:

First: Al Bukhari narrated from Jafar al Sadiq’s father, Muhammad al Baqir, from his grandfather ‘Ali ibn al Hussain, from his great-grandfather al Hussain the martyr, and from his great-great-grandfather ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib. Therefore, if he abstained from him for doctrinal reasons, he would have abstained from all of them, and they are senior Imams of the Imami Shia.

Second: Al Bukhari narrated from some Shia narrators, some of whom were extremists. I have detailed some of them in my research and I will suffice with one narrator here, namely ‘Abbad ibn Yaqub al Rawajini al Asadi al Kufi. He was an extremist exaggerating Shia narrator. In fact, he was even attributed to the Rawafid. He has amazing stories about Shi’ism that are proven from him. Perhaps the most amusing of them is the incident proven from him that was mentioned by al Qasim ibn Zakariyya al Mutarriz, where he said:

 

وردت الكوفة فكتبت عن شيوخها كلهم غير عباد بن يعقوب فلما فرغت دخلت إليه وكان يمتحن من يسمع منه فقال لي من حفر البحر فقلت الله خلق البحر قال هو كذلك ولكن من حفره قلت يذكرالشيخ فقال حفره علي بن أبي طالب ثم قال من أجراه قلت الله مجري الأنهار ومنبغ العيون فقال هو كذلك ولكن من أجرى البحر فقلت يفيدني الشيخ فقال أجراه الحسين بن علي قال وكان عباد مكفوفا ورأيت في داره سيفا معلقا وحجفة فقلت أيها الشيخ لمن هذا السيف فقال لي أعددته لأقاتل به مع المهدي قال فلما فرغت من سماع ما أردت أن أسمعه منه وعزمت على الخروج عن البلد دخلت عليه فسألني فقال من حفر البحر فقلت حفره معاوية وأجراه عمرو بن العاص ثم وثبت من بين يديه وجعلت أعدو وجعل يصيح أدركوا الفاسق عدو الله فاقتلوه

I came to Kufah and wrote from all of its sheikhs except for ‘Abbad ibn Yaqub. When I finished, I went to him. He would test whoever came to listen from him. He said to me, “Who dug the sea?”

I replied, “Allah created the sea.”

He said, “It is like that but who dug it?”

I replied, “Sheikh should mention it.”

He said, “‘Ali ibn Abi Talib dug it.”

Then he asked, “Who made it flow?”

I replied, “Allah is the one who makes the rivers and springs flow.”

He said, “It is like that, but who made the sea flow?”

I said, “Sheikh should inform me of that.”

He said, “Al Hussain ibn ‘Ali made it flow.”

‘Abbad was blind. I saw a sword and a hilt hanging there, so I asked, “O Sheikh, whose sword is this?”

He said, “I prepared it to fight with al Mahdi.”

When I finished hearing what I wanted to hear from him and decided to leave the city, I went to him again and he asked me, “Who dug the sea?”

I replied, “Muawiyah dug it and ‘Amr ibn al ‘As made it flow.” Then I jumped from in front of him and started running, while he started shouting, “Catch the wretched enemy of Allah and kill him.”^[116]

 

His extremism also becomes evident from what ‘Ali ibn Muhammad al Marwazi said:

 

سئل صالح بن محمد عن عباد بن يعقوب الرواجني فقال كان يشتم عثمان قال وسمعت صالحا يقول سمعت عباد بن يعقوب يقول الله أعدل من أن يدخل طلحة والزبير الجنة قلت ويلك ولم قال لأنهما قاتلا علي بن أبي طالب بعد أن بايعاه

Salih ibn Muhammad was asked about ‘Abbad ibn Yaqub al Rawajini. He said, “He used to swear ‘Uthman.”

I heard Salih saying: I heard ‘Abbad ibn Yaqub say, “Allah is more just than to admit Talhah and al Zubair into Jannat.”

I said, “Woe to you. Why?”

He said, “Because they fought against ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib after they pledged allegiance to him.”^[117]

 

Despite this extremism, al Bukhari narrates a hadith from him in al Sahih^[118] and Abu Hatim declared him thiqah. Al Hakim says about him:

 

كان‏ ابن خزيمة إذا حدث عنه يقول حدثنا الثقة في روايته المتهم في رأيه عباد بن يعقوب

When Ibn Khuzaimah narrated from him, he would say, “One who is thiqah in his narration, accused in his opinion, ‘Abbad ibn Yaqub, narrated to us.”^[119]

 

Al Daraqutni says regarding him:

 

شيعي‏ صدوق

He is a saduq (truthful) Shia.

 

Al Dhahabi ends by saying:

 

الشيخ العالم الصدوق

The Sheikh saduq scholar.^[120]

 

As for al Hafiz, he says:

 

صد‏وق رافضي

He is saduq and Rafidi.^[121]

 

If al Bukhari’s view of the narrators had been focused on their beliefs and mazhabs, he would have turned away completely from ‘Abbad and others like him. However, when he was thiqah, he accepted him, even though he was a burning extremist Shia and accused of being a Rafidi. It is clear that al Bukhari does not see Shi’ism and love of the Ahlul Bayt—in fact, even exaggeration in it—as an accusation that the narrator is stigmatised with and discarded because of it.

It is also evident that a kind of political freedom enjoyed by narrators enabled such people to express these mazhabs and opinions openly, without fear or apprehension. Similar was the case with the one from whom al Bukhari narrated, otherwise he would have abstained from him.

Third: Al Bukhari’s relative tawthiq of al Sadiq’s descendants. In the biography of Muhammad ibn Jafar al Sadiq, the leader of the well-known revolt against al Ma’mun, he mentioned Ibrahim ibn al Mundhir’s statement:

 

كان إسحاق أخوه أوثق منه وأقدم سنا

His brother Ishaq was more thiqah and elder than him.^[122]

 

Al Bukhari makes tawthiq of al Sadiq’s descendants and relies on them, which indicates that the view of enmity towards the Ahlul Bayt is non-existent and that the issue is beyond beliefs and mazhabs, otherwise he would have disparaged his descendants and criticised them.

Fourth: Al Bukhari himself praised al Sadiq in another book and relied on him in his book Khalq Af’al al ‘Ibad to infer against the Jahmiyyah, beginning this by saying: chapter on what the scholars have mentioned to the Mu’attilah who want to change the words of Allah.^[123] He is one of the senior scholars whose words are used to infer against the innovators and misguided ones, according to al Bukhari. If the matter had been related to politics or mazhab, he would have abstained from him here as well, which is more appropriate.

Based on all of this, I can claim, through these two studies, that al Bukhari was not subjective in selecting the ahadith and narrators in his al Sahih—at least in the book of merits and in narrating from the Ahlul Bayt—where his ideology prevailed over him and his thoughts controlled him, so that his mazhab infiltrates into his Hadith. Rather, he transmitted the sahih ahadith as they were narrated. He selected sahih ahadith based on their strength according to the historical tawthiq methodology, not according to his opinion, belief, and thought. Otherwise, he would have abstained from many ahadith that the Shia and others use as evidence.

However, al Bukhari’s views and mazhab becomes evident in the chapters and titles that he placed before each hadith. This is a natural matter, which is consistent with his high scholarly and fiqhi personality, as he displayed his opinions, ideas, and views in those chapters. This is what every scholar who explains the hadith according to an intellectual methodology that he adheres to, does. However, tawthiq of the text is a different matter due to the intricacy of deducing from it and scrutiny of the hidden meanings in it.

 

5. The Muhaddithin’s criticism of Sahih al Bukhari: Confirming the status or casting doubt on it?

The scholars and critics accepted al Bukhari’s book. Their statements were repeatedly narrated in this regard, as mentioned above. However, this does not mean that his book was not free from any type of criticism throughout the ages, as a number of senior critics criticised it after him. Imam Abu Hatim Ibn Hibban (d. 354 AH) criticised it in the introduction to his al Sahih, condemning his strictness and not narrating from some of the thiqah narrators in his opinion. The most important one was Hammad ibn Salamah, the great thiqah Imam.^[124] He repeated his condemnation of that in more than one book.^[125] Then came al Daraqutni (d. 385 AH) in his two books, al Ilzamat and al Tatabbu’. He criticised several ahadith. Hafiz al Ismaili (d. 377 AH) had many criticisms in his Mustakhraj ‘ala Sahih al Bukhari.^[126] Likewise, Abu Mas’ud al Dimashqi (d. 401 AH) and Abu ‘Ali al Ghassani (d. 498 AH) also criticised al Sahih in other places.^[127]

Perhaps the most famous criticism directed at Sahih al Bukhari was from the senior critic Imam Abu al Hassan al Daraqutni, as he criticised more than 100 ahadith of al Sahih. His criticisms spread among scholars and Hafiz Ibn Hajar criticised his criticisms in a lengthy introduction to the book Fath al Bari, wherein he provided answers for most of the ahadith.

I believe that these criticisms confirm the status of Sahih al Bukhari and that it is the most superior book that compiled sahih ahadith, throughout time, and not a reason for doubting its status. This is due to the following reasons:

First: This criticism from a great and meticulous scholar like al Daraqutni indicates that the critical community was still alive and that no one is sacred in knowledge. The science of Hadith is a clear manifestation of that.

If al Daraqutni or others had not criticised al Bukhari, it would have been a source of objection and astonishment, as the science of Hadith is, by its nature, a vital critical science, as it has become evident. Views and discussions do not stop in critical sciences.

Second: The number of criticised ahadith according to al Daraqutni does not exceed 100 ahadith,^[128] and the number of ahadith in Sahih al Bukhari with repetitions is 7 250. Therefore, the ratio is less than 1.5%, which shows additional confirmation of the status of al Sahih. It is as if al Daraqutni is saying that I tried to track and scrutinise al Sahih, but I only came up with very few ahadith. As for the rest, I accept it and acknowledge the strength of what it contains.

This is confirmed by the fact that al Daraqutni wrote an entire book on this and did not write those criticisms in a footnote or in a small marginal discussion, as he was keen to show tracking and criticism. Despite that, he did not mention more than those (100) ahadith.

Third: The content of these criticisms is mostly directed at partial formalities and not directed at the hadith as a whole. I studied a sample of these ahadith, comprising of the first twenty ahadith.^[129] Most of the criticism in them were directed at the difference in the isnad, while the text of the hadith was established (seven ahadith),^[130] or at the addition or omission of the narrators in the isnad (six ahadith),^[131] or to the ittisal (continuity) of the isnad (three ahadith)^[132] or to the names of the narrators (two ahadith).^[133] When the criticism is directed to the text, it is directed to the issue of the narrator abbreviating it (one hadith)^[134] or changing a word in it (one hadith),^[135] without directing it to the complete original hadith.

There was no criticism directed at the entire hadith in these twenty ahadith, in terms of isnad and text, in such a way that one could say that it is a da’if hadith and al Bukhari erred in narrating it.

Despite that, Hafiz Ibn Hajar responded to most of those criticisms and explained al Bukhari’s insight in them, even though he agreed with al Daraqutni in some of them.^[136] No one is sacred in the sciences of Hadith.

Fourth: Calling al Daraqutni’s work ‘criticisms’ is a name that contains tolerance and leniency, even though it is common in the expressions of senior scholars. I believe that we should call it what al Daraqutni himself called it, i.e. tracking, not criticism, because al Daraqutni, through his book, intended to track, not criticise. Tracking includes criticism and mere extra scrutiny without criticism. At times, a student may track the precise statements in his teacher’s book to display his deep understanding of his scholarly behaviour in the book. It is as if he is saying to him that I am on a high level of knowledge, which enables me to understand your indications and behaviour.

Tracking in this sense is found in al Daraqutni. It cannot be considered a ‘criticism’ in the well-known, and common sense, due to the following:

I. The differences in the narration in many of the ahadith that al Daraqutni criticised were not concealed to al Bukhari, as he was aware of them. In many cases, he narrated both paths in his al Sahih; the correct path and the path that al Daraqutni tracked. Since al Daraqutni was not always a critic, he did not make tad’if of one of the paths among them. Rather, he mentions the two paths and remains silent, as if he is saying that I am scrutinising these narrations with extra scrutiny to show that there is room for consideration and contemplation in them, without asserting the tad’if of a narration and preferring the other.^[137]

II. That al Daraqutni himself preferred some of the narrations that al Bukhari selected in other places in his books. He tracked some of the ahadith, mentioning the different narrations in them and was silent about that, without preferring any of them in the book al Tatabbu’, and then we see him in his book al ‘Ilal preferring what al Bukhari preferred.^[138] In some of the ahadith in al Tatabbu’, he shows that al Bukhari’s action was well founded.^[139]

Based on this, it is ‘tracking’ and scrutinising by a senior Imam of the Imams of criticism on the book of a senior Imam of the Imams of criticism as well. It can be said that it confirms its position as the most authentic book after the Book of Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala.

 

6. If Allah had not created al Bukhari: Ahadith that al Bukhari narrated isolated from all other books of Sunnah[140]

It is evident from what has passed that Sahih al Bukhari is the most prominent compiled book of Islam, and that al Bukhari worked on it with great mastery. His mastery was evident in his compilation of sahih ahadith of the highest degree, in his selection of narrators, in his tasnif, arrangement, criticism, etc., that have become famous and well-known. He is an Imam in this regard; however, in terms of being a narrator of Hadith—not a compiler and collector—he was merely a narrator in a chain of ahadith, who could be replaced with tens of other narrators in his time.

The isnad tree in Figure 3 illustrates the chain I refer to:

It is a hadith on the merits of ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu. Al Bukhari narrated it through the path of Sa’d ibn Abi Waqqas radiya Llahu ‘anhu with the wording:

 

أنت مني بمنزلة هارون من موسى إلا أنه لا نبي بعدي

You are to me as Harun was to Musa, except that there is no prophet after me.^[141]

 

This tree shows that it is narrated in dozens of Hadith books through many paths exceeding 120 paths, and al Bukhari only had two chains in this whole tree. If al Bukhari had not narrated it, no change would have occurred in the existence of the hadith and its narration, as it was present, established, and widespread among the narrators since the first classes. The hadith was not obscure, that al Bukhari had discovered it and narrated it in his al Sahih. It was not hidden from the Muhaddithin and narrators, that al Bukhari exposed it to them. Rather, it was well-known and famous through many paths and al Bukhari was one of those who narrated it. However, his distinction was in selecting the sahih, high ahadith and in selecting the precise paths of their narrations.

I have explored all of al Bukhari’s ahadith and found them to be in this state. Al Bukhari does not narrate any hadith isolated, which no one else narrated. Usually, a number of narrators join him. Sometimes, they may be few and their number may be less than five, whilst at other times, they may be many, to such an extent that some ahadith may have hundreds of chains, and al Bukhari narrates one or two paths from them. Most of those ahadith are narrated in the six books, Musnad Ahmed, and other compilations—Ma’ajim and Sunan, but not through al Bukhari’s path.

To my knowledge, only one hadith is excluded from this principle, which al Bukhari narrated and I did not find it by any other compiler of the famous Hadith books. Al Bukhari is isolated in its full isnad and the text. It is the hadith al Bukhari narrated in his al Sahih in the book of etiquettes, chapter on what is suspicion. He states:

 

حدثنا‏ سعيد بن عفيرحدثنا الليث عن عقيل عن ابن شهاب عن عروة عن عائشة قالت قال النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم ما أظن فلانا وفلانا يعرفان من ديننا شيئا قال الليث كانا رجلين من المنافقين

Sa’id bin ‘Ufayr narrated to us — al Layth narrated to us — from ‘Aqil — from Ibn Shihab — from ‘Urwah — from Aisha radiya Llahu ‘anha who said that the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam said, “I do not think that so-and-so and so-and-so know anything about our din.”

Al Layth said, “They were two hypocrites.”^[142]

 

From Ibn Hajar’s explanation of it in Fath al Bari, it appears that there is no mention of any other path or source of the hadith. This research is in the sources that are available to us. Perhaps, there exists a manuscript or a book of narration that reported this hadith and we did not come across it.

I reached this single hadith from several sources, which I researched extensively:

First: Relying on computer programs. Perhaps the most important of which is the program of the Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques. I extracted from it the ahadith that al Bukhari narrated isolated, from more than 32 of the main books of Sunnah and I found that it mentions 15 ahadith. Then I scrutinised each one manually to find out that all of them have other isnad except for this single hadith.

Second: The book of Dr. ‘Awwad Khalaf entitled Sahih al Huffaz fi ma Infarada bihi al Bukhari fi Sahihihi ‘an Baqi al Sittah, wherein he lists all the ahadith that al Bukhari narrated isolated from the other five books. In his introduction, he mentioned his methodology in this statistic and concluded that the number of ahadith is 135 ahadith. I tracked all of these ahadith and studied them in detail and concluded that they are all in compilations other than the six books, such as Musnad Ahmed, Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah and Sunan al Bayhaqi, except for this one hadith.

Third: The texts scattered in the commentaries and books, especially in Fath al Bari, through which we can identify the expected places where the narrations are found in other compilations. I tracked the discussions of Hafiz on the ahadith whose sources were difficult for the researchers and the same result was confirmed.

This means that al Bukhari was, in terms of narrating Hadith, just a narrator among the narrators, but in terms of Hadith compilation, tasnif, scrutiny, and criticism, he is one of the greatest Imams. Based on this result, if Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala had not created al Bukhari, only one hadith from the ahadith of the Muslims would have been lost. In my opinion, this hadith that al Bukhari narrated isolated, is not one of the ahadith that Islam revolves around nor do the rulings revolve around it and many ahadith in its category suffice for it. So if it were not narrated, nothing would have been lost from Din.

Then I came across an important text by Imam Ibn Taymiyyah wherein he clarifies this same idea and says:

 

ومثل هؤلاء الجهال يظنون أن الأحاديث التي في البخاري ومسلم إنما أخذت عن البخاري ومسلم…وأن البخاري ومسلما كان الغلط يروج عليهما أو كانا يتعمدان الكذب ولا يعلمون أن قولنا رواه البخاري ومسلم علامة لنا على ثبوت صحته لا أنه كان صحيحا بمجرد رواية البخاري ومسلم بل أحاديث البخاري ومسلم رواها غيرهما من العلماء والمحدثين من لا يحصي عدده إلا الله ولم ينفرد واحد منهما بحديث بل ما من حديث إلا وقد رواه قبل زمانه وفي زمانه وبعد زمانه طوائف ولو لم يخلق البخاري ومسلم لم ينقص من الدين شيء وكانت تلك ‏الأحاديث موجودة بأسانيد يحصل بها المقصود وفوق المقصود

Such ignorant people think that the ahadith in al Bukhari and Muslim were only taken from al Bukhari and Muslim…and that al Bukhari and Muslim were prone to making mistakes or that they would intentionally lie. They do not know that our statement ‘it was narrated by al Bukhari and Muslim’ is a sign for us that its authenticity is proven, not that it was sahih simply because al Bukhari and Muslim narrated it. In fact, the ahadith of al Bukhari and Muslim were narrated by many other scholars and Muhaddithin, whose number is only known to Allah. Not one of them narrated a hadith isolated. In fact, there is no hadith except that a group of narrators narrated it before their time, during their time, and after their time. If al Bukhari and Muslim had not been created, nothing would have been lost from Din. Those ahadith were existent through such isnad that would have achieved the intended purpose and more than the intended purpose.^[143]

 

This is a strong and clear opinion, wherewith we can discuss the contemporary question: Where is the original copy of Sahih al Bukhari? Or how can we trust the narrators of al Sahih from al Bukhari, perhaps there are those among them who were not thiqah in narrating this important book? This is so because the issue of the existence of all the ahadith of Sahih al Bukhari, authenticated and known in other books, responds to those two questions of criticism. If we accept that the original copy did not survive or that the narrators were not at that level of integrity, then all the ahadith of al Sahih are existent and known in other books, through other isnad. They can be studied and the sahih ones among them can be stipulated through those books. If Sahih al Bukhari were to be deleted from existence, this would not necessitate the deletion of its ahadith, except for one hadith—as it appears to us, and it may have a path that we did not find—even if we did not find the original copy of al Sahih. This is because what it contains is proven, existent, and known through other chains, some of which may reach hundreds of chains. Al Bukhari did not invent anything on his own. Even if Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala had not created al Bukhari, the ahadith would not have decreased.

This is despite the fact that a number of studies have discussed the issue of the original copy and the trustworthiness of the narrators of Sahih al Bukhari.^[144] We will not elaborate on that.

 

 

NEXT⇒ Conclusion – Prophetic Ahadith: From the solidity of the discourse of Hadith criticism to the instability of modern reception.

---

^[1]  Al Bukhari: al Tarikh al Kabir, 1/343; Ibn Hajar: Ta’liq al Ta’liq, 5/385.

^[2]  Al Khatib al Baghdadi: Tarikh Baghdad, 2/324; al Mizzi: Tahdhib al Kamal, 24/349.

^[3]  Al Khatib al Baghdadi: Tarikh Baghdad, 2/325; al Mizzi: Tahdhib Al Kamal, 24/349.

^[4]  Al Bukhari said:

دخلت بغداد آخر ثمان مرات كل ذلك أجالس أحمد بن حنبل

I entered Baghdad the last eight times, all of which I sat with Ahmed ibn Hanbal. (al Khatib al Baghdadi: Tarikh Baghdad, 2/343.)

Al Tarikh al Kabir, 1/454, 3/101 contains many quotations from Ahmed that he heard from him, and quotations from Ibn Ma’in with the wording: ‘He told me,’ or ‘he narrated to us’. Al Bukhari’s relationship with Ibn Ma’in needs a detailed study, as the books of history do not mention much of that. Al Bukhari does not rely on him or praise him much. Rather, I came across a text wherein al Bukhari criticises Ibn Ma’in’s opinion of a narrator and expresses that by saying:

والذي قال يحيى عجب

What Yahya said is strange. (Al Tarikh al Kabir, 4/30.)

The quotations from Ibn al Madini and Ahmed Ibn Hanbal about al Bukhari are many, but we can hardly find more than one quotation from Ibn Ma’in about al Bukhari. The story of al Bukhari presenting his al Sahih to Ibn Ma’in and others is doubtful.

^[5]  Ibn Hajar: Hady al Sari, 1/347.

^[6]  Al Khatib al Baghdadi: Tarikh Baghdad, 2/337; al Mizzi: Tahdhib al Kamal, 24/451.

^[7]  Al Khatib al Baghdadi: Tarikh Baghdad, 13/428; al Mizzi: Tahdhib al Kamal, 21/18.

^[8]  Al Khatib al Baghdadi: Tarikh Baghdad, 2/337; al Mizzi: Tahdhib al Kamal, 24/451.

^[9]  Al Khatib al Baghdadi: Tarikh Baghdad, 2/337; al Mizzi: Tahdhib al Kamal, 24/451.

^[10]  Al Khatib al Baghdadi: Tarikh Baghdad, 2/338; al Mizzi: Tahdhib al Kamal, 24/452.

^[11]  Al Khatib al Baghdadi: Tarikh Baghdad, 2/388; al Mizzi: Tahdhib al Kamal, 24/452.

^[12]  Al Khatib al Baghdadi: Tarikh Baghdad, 2/236-237; al Mizzi: Tahdhib al Kamal, 24/450.

^[13]  Al Khatib al Baghdadi: Tarikh Baghdad, 2/387; al Mizzi: Tahdhib al Kamal, 24/451.

^[14]  Al Khatib al Baghdadi: Tarikh Baghdad, 2/342; al Mizzi: Tahdhib al Kamal, 24/456.

^[15]  Al Khatib al Baghdadi: Tarikh Baghdad, 2/326; al Mizzi: Tahdhib al Kamal, 24/441.

^[16]  Al Khatib al Baghdadi: Tarikh Baghdad, 2/338; Al Mizzi: Tahdhib al Kamal, 24/452.

^[17]  Al Khatib al Baghdadi: Tarikh Baghdad, 2/339; Al Mizzi: Tahdhib al Kamal, 24/454.

^[18]  Al Khatib al Baghdadi: Tarikh Baghdad, 2/343; Al Mizzi: Tahdhib al Kamal, 24/457.

^[19]  Al Khatib al Baghdadi: Tarikh Baghdad, 2/323; al Mizzi: Tahdhib al Kamal, 24/447. See the benefits derived from this incident in ‘Abdul Fattah Abu Ghuddah: Safahat Min Sabr al ‘Ulama’, pg. 122-123.

^[20]  Al Khatib al Baghdadi: Tarikh Baghdad, 2/333; al Mizzi: Tahdhib al Kamal, 24/448; ‘Abdul Fattah Abu Ghuddah: Safahat Min Sabr al ‘Ulama’, pg. 122-123.

^[21]  Al Khatib al Baghdadi: Tarikh Baghdad, 2/235; al Mizzi: Tahdhib al Kamal, 24/440.

^[22]  Al Bukhari mentioned that he compiled it three times, (Al Khatib al Baghdadi: Tarikh Baghdad, 2/235.) This is interpreted to mean that he published it three times for the people, adding and amending each time. What indicates to the fact that he continued to amend it until a late time, is the presence of some of those mentioned by al Bukhari, whose deaths are mentioned to be at the end of the 240s AH. Among them are; Muhammad ibn Hamid (d. 248 AH) (al Bukhari: al Tarikh al Kabir, 1/69–70) and Muhammad ibn Abi ‘Awn Abu Bakr al Baghdadi, (d. 249 AH) (al Tarikh al Kabir, 1/226). In fact, he mentioned the death of his sheikh, Bundar, Muhammad ibn Bashshar, to be in the year 252 AH (al Tarikh al Kabir, 1/49) and his sheikh, ‘Abbad ibn Yaqub al Rawajini (d. 250 AH) (al Tarikh al Kabir, 6/44).

^[23]  Al Khatib al Baghdadi: Tarikh Baghdad, 2/235; al Mizzi: Tahdhib Al Kamal, 24/440.

^[24]  Al Khatib al Baghdadi: Tarikh Baghdad, 2/236; al Mizzi: Tahdhib Al Kamal, 24/441.

^[25]  Al Khatib al Baghdadi: Tarikh Baghdad, 2/235; al Mizzi: Tahdhib Al Kamal, 24/440.

^[26]  Al Dhahabi: Tarikh al Islam, 6/153-154. He attributed it to Kitab al Kuna (book on agnomens), and it is in it, 2/272, except that the text in it is not correct. There are distortions in it, which are corrected through this text.

^[27]  Ibn Rajab: Sharh al ‘Ilal, 1/496.

^[28]  Al Bukhari: al Tarikh al Kabir, 3/504–505.

^[29]  Al Nadr passed away before the year 110 AH. Ibn Sa’d said about him:

كان ثقة وله أحاديث وقد روي عنه ومات قبل الحسن

He was thiqah. He narrated many ahadith. Others narrated from him. He passed away before al Hassan. (Al Tabaqat, 7/191.)

^[30]  Sahih al Bukhari, book on clothing, chapter on whoever draws a picture will be commanded to breathe life into it on the Day of Qiyamah and he will not be able to do so, Hadith: 5963; Sahih Muslim, book on clothing and adornment, chapter on angels do not enter a house wherein there is a dog or an animate picture, Hadith: 2110.

^[31]  Al Bukhari: al Sahih, 3/82.

^[32]  I derived this example and that expression from our critic professor Dr. ‘Abdul Karim al Warikat in his valuable lecture on the effect of knowing Imam al Bukhari’s methodology in al Tarikh al Kabir in clarifying his methodology in the al Jami’ al Sahih, which he delivered at the Sahih al Bukhari Conference at Ibn Khaldun University on 11/2/2019 (https://youtu.be/xc5kTNp0icU).

^[33]  Al Tirmidhi: al ‘Ilal al Saghir, ‎3/232; al Nawawi: Tahdhib al Asma’ wa al Lughat,‎ 1/70.

^[34]  Al Khatib al Baghdadi: Tarikh Baghdad, 2/348; al Hakim: Ma’rifat ‘Ulum al Hadith, pg. 74.

^[35]  al Dhahabi: Siyar A’lam al Nubala’, 12/395.

^[36]  Al Khatib al Baghdadi: Tarikh Baghdad, 2/233; al Mizzi: Tahdhib al Kamal, 24/449. The name of the book is mentioned as al Sihah by al Khatib al Baghdadi and al Mizzi. Al Dhahabi, in Siyar A’lam al Nubala’, 12/405, named it as al Sahih, and the book is the same.

^[37]  Ibn Hajar mentioned two numbers in Fath al Bari. The first in the Muqaddamah, 1/477, which is 2602, and the second at the end of the book, 13/543, which is 2513.

^[38]  Al Khatib al Baghdadi: Tarikh Baghdad, 2/237; al Mizzi: Tahdhib al Kamal, 24/443.

^[39]  Ibn ‘Adi: al Kamil, 6/557.

^[40]  Imam Ahmed was asked:

عمن يكتب الموطأ فقال عن القعنبي

From who should the al Muwatta’ be written?

He said, “From al Qa’nabi.” (Al Sijzi: Su’alatuhu li al Hakim, pg. 327 (313).)

Similarly, Abu Hatim also preferred him regarding al Muwatta’ as well. (Ibn Abi Hatim: al Jarh wa al Ta’dil, 5/181.)

Ibn Ma’in said:

أثبت‏ الناس في الموطأ عبد الله بن مسلمة القعنبي وعبد الله بن يوسف التنيسي بعده

The most thabit of people in al Muwatta’ are ‘Abdullah ibn Maslamah al Qa’nabi, and thereafter, ‘Abdullah ibn Yusuf al Tanisi. (Al Sijzi: Su’alatuhu li al Hakim, pg. 329 (159).)

Al Nasa’i said:

القعنبي فوق عبد الله بن يوسف في الموطأ

Al Qa’nabi is above ‘Abdullah ibn Yusuf in al Muwatta’. (Al Sulami: Su’alatuhu li al Daraqutni, pg. 184 (159).)

His statement is mentioned in his biography where he states:

لزمت مالكا عشرين سنة حتى قرأت عليه الموطأ

I stayed with Malik for twenty years until I read al Muwatta’ to him. (Al Qadi ‘Iyad: Tartib al Madarik, 3/198; Ibn Nasir al Din al Dimashqi: Ithaf al Salik bi Ruwat al Muwatta’ ‘an al Imam Malik, pg. 251.)

^[41]  M. Fuad Sezgin: Buhârî’nin Kaynakları, pg. 87-117.

^[42]  When al Bukhari wrote the biography of Sulaiman ibn Harb in al Tarikh al Kabir, 4/9, he boasted of his high isnad and the prominence of his sheikh. He said:

قال‏ علي (يعني ابن المديني) عن يحيى القطان عن سليمان (يعني بن حرب) عن حماد بن زيد ما أخاف على أيوب وابن عون إلا الحديث قال أبو عبد الله وسمعته من سليمان

‘Ali (i.e. Ibn al Madini) said — from Yahya al Qattan — from Sulaiman (i.e. Ibn Harb) — from Hammad ibn Zaid, “I do not fear upon Ayub and Ibn Awn except Hadith.” Abu ‘Abdullah says, “I heard it from Sulaiman.”

This means that al Bukhari narrates the hadith from ‘Ali ibn al Madini — from al Qattan — from Sulaiman ibn Harb, and he narrates it directly from Sulaiman, thus, elevating the isnad by two stages. Similarly, this narration indicates to the prominence of Sulaiman, from whom Yahya al Qattan narrated in the past.

Al Khatib al Baghdadi narrates in Tarikh Baghdad, 10/64, with more detail. Ahmed ibn Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr al Muqaddami states:

سمعت علي ابن المديني سنة عشرين وقد ذكر له سليمان بن حرب فجعل يكثره فقال حدثنا يحيى بن سعيد منذ ثلاثين سنة فقال حدثني سليمان بن حرب عن حماد بن زيد قال ما أخاف على أيوب وابن عون إلا الحديث

I heard ‘Ali ibn al Madini in the year twenty (i.e. 220 AH) when Sulaiman ibn Harb was mentioned to him. He began to mention him excessively and said, “Yahya ibn Sa’id narrated to us thirty years ago and said, ‘Sulaiman ibn Harb narrated to me from Hammad ibn Zaid, who said, ‘I do not fear upon Ayub and Ibn ‘Awn except Hadith.’”

This indicates the high status of Sulaiman, as Yahya narrated from him from Hammad in the year 190 AH.

^[43]  Ibn Abi Hatim: al Jarh wa al Ta’dil, 4/108; al Dhahabi: Tarikh al Islam, 5/582.

^[44]  Ibn Abi Hatim: al Jarh wa al Ta’dil, 4/109; al Dhahabi: Siyar A’lam al Nubala’, 1/332.

^[45]  Ibn Abi Hatim: al Jarh wa al Ta’dil, 4/108; al Khatib al Baghdadi: Tarikh Baghdad, 10/45.

^[46]  Dr. Sezgin’s study on the sources of al Bukhari was an earnest, important, and strong study that surpassed its history in terms of addressing this issue. I do not know of any parallel to it in the Arab world. However, it requires editing and a breakdown of some of the inferences and some of the outcomes that he reached. Professor Ali Albayrak deliberated it well in his book Masadir al Bukhari wa Fu’ad Sazkin. (Ali Albayrak: Buhârî’nin Kaynakları ve Fuad Sezgin.)

The issue of the sources of the famous books of Sunnah is generally absent in academic research in the Arab world. It is a topic worthy of being studied.

^[47]  Al Dhahabi: Tarikh al Islam, 6/142.

^[48]  Al Nawawi: Sharh Muslim, 1/14; Ibn al Salah: Ma’rifat Anwa’ ‘Ilm al Hadith, pg. 18.

^[49]  Ibn Hajar said in Hady al Sari, 1/19:

المقصود من هذا التصنيف بالذات هو الأحاديث‎ الصحيحة المسندة وهي التي ترجم لها والمذكور بالعرض والتبع الآثار الموقوفة والأحاديث المعلقة

The actual objective of this tasnif is the sahih musnad ahadith, for which he set up chapters. The mawquf and mu’allaq narrations are mentioned for presentations and supplementary purposes.

Prior to that, he stated:

إن البخاري إنما يورد ما يورد من الموقوفات من فتاوى الصحابة والتابعين ومن تفاسيرهم لكثير من الآيات على طريق الاستئناس والتقوية لما يختاره من المذاهب في المسائل التي فيها الخلاف بين الأئمة

Al Bukhari only presents mawquf narrations from the fatawa of the Companions and the Tabi’in, and commentary of many verses, in order to familiarise and strengthen the mazhab he selected, in the rulings wherein there are differences among the Imams.

^[50]  There are many texts of Imams regarding that. Refer to Ibn al Salah: Siyanat Sahih Muslim, pg. 83–131; Ma’rifat Anwa’ ‘Ilm al Hadith, pg. 66; Ibn Rajab: Sharh al ‘Ilal, 2/586 onwards, and Ibn Hajar: al Nukat ‘Ala Muqaddamat Ibn al Salah, 2/595.

Dr. al Sharif Hatim disagreed with majority of Muhaddithin in this issue and went on to say that al Bukhari does not stipulate confirmation of liqa’ a precondition and that his mazhab is the same as Muslim and that there is consensus of the Muhaddithin on it. He compiled a strong study in that, entitled Ijma’ al Muhaddithin ‘Ala ‘Adam Ishtirat al ‘Ilm bi al Sima’ fi al Hadith al Mu’an’an Bayn al Muta’asirin. Dr. Ibrahim al Lahim disputed it in well-known articles, and he has a book on this subject entitled al Ittisal wa al Inqita’. Dr. al Sharif Hatim al ‘Awni also responded to it and disputed with him in the book al Intifa’ bi Munaqashat Kitab al Ittisal wa al Inqita’, which is more comprehensive than his first book. And our teacher, Sheikh Muhammad ‘Awwamah, has a small treatise entitled al Liqa’ Bayn al Rawiyayn Qarinah ‘Ala al Ittisal aw Shart Lahu, wherein he concluded that liqa’ between two narrators is evidence of ittisal and not a condition for it. His outcome conformed to the outcome of al Sharif Hatim that is not a condition (as a condition, not as evidence), which is attributed to Imam al Bukhari (Thubut al Liqa’ Bayn al Rawiyayn).

^[51]  I came across some narrators whose ‘adalah was questioned due to their action, not belief. Hafiz Ibn Hajar clarified that this does not harm their narrations at all. Refer to the biography of Ahmed ibn al Miqdam ibn Sulaiman al ‘Ijli in Hady al Sari, pg. 387. Likewise, refer to the biography of Yaqub ibn Humaid ibn Kasib al Madani in it, pg. 453.

^[52]  Al Bukhari: al Sahih, Hadith: 6440.

^[53]  Ibn Hibban: al Sahih, 1/153-155; al Thiqat, 6/216–217.

^[54]  An example of that is the marfu’ hadith of Abu Hurairah radiya Llahu ‘anhu:

ما أدري تبع أنبيا كان أم لا…

I do not know whether Tubba’ was a prophet or not…

Al Hakim judged it as sahih in his al Mustadrak, Hadith: 104, and said:

صحيح‏ على شرط الشيخين ولا أعلم له علة ولم يخرجاه

It is sahih according to the conditions of Sheikhayn. I do not know of any ‘illah in it, and they did not narrate it.

This is despite the fact that al Bukhari declared it defective in al Tarikh al Kabir, 1/153, in terms of isnad and text.

^[55]  Al Khatib al Baghdadi: Tarikh Baghdad, 2/352; Ibn Hajar: al Nukat, 2/718-720.

^[56]  Al Khatib al Baghdadi: Tarikh Baghdad, 15/124.

^[57]  Al Suyuti: Tadrib al Rawi, 2/290 onwards; Ibn Hajar: Nuzhat al Nazar, pg. 63 -64.

^[58]  Al Hazimi: Shurut al A’immah al Khamsah, pg. 151; Ibn Rajab: Sharh al ‘Ilal, 2/613; Ibn Hajar: Hady al Sari, 1/9.

^[59]  Ibn Rajab: Sharh al ‘Ilal, 2/614; Ibn Hajar: Hady al Sari, 1/9-10.

^[60]  Ibn Hajar: Hady al Sari, 1/10.

^[61]  Al Hazimi: Shurut al A’immah al Khamsah, pg. 151; Ibn Rajab: Sharh al ‘Ilal, 2/614.

^[62]  Al Hazimi: Shurut al A’immah al Khamsah, pg. 151; Ibn Rajab: Sharh al ‘Ilal, 2/614; Ibn Hajar: Hady al Sari, 1/9-10.

^[63]  Ibn Rajab: Sharh al ‘Ilal, 2/615.

^[64]  Ibn Hajar: Hady al Sari, 1/10.

^[65]  Refer to his statement about ‘Abbad ibn Rashid al Tamimi in his book al Du’afa’, pg. 79, where he stated:

‎ يهم الشيء روى عنه ابن مهدي وتركه يحيى القطان

He gets confused in some matters. Ibn Mahdi narrated from him and Yahya al Qattan discarded him.

Despite that, he narrated one hadith from him in al Sahih, Hadith: 4529, as a mutabi’. Likewise, his statement about al Hassan ibn Shadhan al Wasiti in Tarikh al Awsat, 2/385, where he said:

يتكلمون فيه

They criticise him.

However, he narrated one hadith from him in al Sahih, Hadith: 4159. There are many different paths of this narration, which he narrated in al Sahih itself. Ibn Hajar was redressed because of this narrator in Hady al Sari, ninth chapter, under the discussion of the names of those narrators of this book who were criticised, as he did not mention him.

^[66]  Refer to the scholars’ statements about him in al Mizzi: Tahdhib Al Kamal, 3/124–129.

^[67]  Al Kashmiri: Fayd al Bari, 3/606.

^[68]  Mutaba’at refers to those narrations, which corroborate that a certain person heard a hadith from a certain teacher by serving as evidence that a different student had heard the same hadith from that teacher.

^[69]  Shawahid are those ahadith that are narrated from a totally different chain of transmission (with a different Sahabi) but contain the same meaning as the hadith in question and thus bolstering its reliability.

^[70]  Imam Muslim refrained from narrating from ‘Ikrimah in his al Sahih, whereas al Bukhari narrated from him. Hafiz Ibn Hajar spent a long time defending him in Hady al Sari, 1/425.

^[71]  Al Mu’allimi al Yamani: al Tankil, 2/692.

^[72]  Ibn ‘Abdul Hadi: al Sarim al Munki, pg. 194–195.

^[73]  Muqaddamat Tahqiq al Mu’allimi al Yamani li Muwaddih al Jam’ wa al Tafriq li al Khatib al Baghdadi, pg. 14.

^[74]  Ibn al Munir: al Mutawari ‘Ala Tarajim Abwab al Bukhari, pg. 86.

^[75]  Ibn Hajar: Fath al Bari, 1/8.

^[76]  Al Qastallani: Irshad al Sari, 1/24.

^[77]  Al Bukhari: al Sahih, Hadith: 4473, 5105. There is difference of opinion regarding Hadith: 5879, whether it is from Ahmed ibn Hanbal or someone else? (Ibn Mandah: Asami Mashayikh al Imam al Bukhari, pg. 28; Ibn Hajar: Fath al Bari, 10/329.

Hafiz Ibn Hajar believes that al Bukhari did not narrate much from Ahmed ibn Hanbal because:

لأنه في رحلته القديمة لقي كثيرا من مشايخ أحمد فاستغنى بهم وفي رحلته الأخيرة كان أحمد قد قطع التحديث فكان لا يحدث إلا نادرا ومن ثم أكثر البخاري عن علي بن المديني دون أحمد

In his old journey, he met many of Ahmed’s teachers and he sufficed with them. In his last journey, Ahmed had stopped narrating. He would narrate very rarely, and therefore al Bukhari mostly narrated from ‘Ali ibn al Madini, not Ahmed. (Fath al Bari, 9/154.)

^[78]  Mahir al Fahl: Ibraz Sun’at al Hadith Wajib al Waqt, pg. 27.

^[79]  Surah al Tawbah: 91.

^[80]  Al Bukhari: al Sahih, 1/21, Hadith: 57, 58.

^[81]  Al Khattabi: A’lam al Hadith, 1/187-188.

^[82]  Ibn Hajar: Fath al Bari, 1/137.

^[83]  Al ‘Ayni: ‘Umdat al Qari: 1/321.

^[84]  Al Bukhari: al Tarikh al Kabir, 6/460, 2/10.

^[85]  Refer to Ahmed al Bashabashah: al Tad’if al Ishari fi Daw’ Tarajim al Jami’ al Sahih; ‘Abdullah al Fawzan: Isharat al Naqd al Hadithi fi Ba’d Tarajim Sahih al Bukhari; Khalid al Thabiti: Isharat al Bukhari fi Kitabihi al Jami’ al Sahih Dirasat Tahliliyyah; Maysa’ al Rawabdah: al Ahadith al Lati Wada’aha al Bukhari Talmihan fi al Jami’ al Saghir wa Dhakaraha Tasrihan fi al Jami’ al Kabir.

^[86]  Sa’id Bashanfar: Manhaj al Imam al Bukhari fi ‘Ard al Hadith al Ma’lul fi al Jami’ al Sahih, pg. 7-9.

^[87]  It was published in a book published by Ibn Khaldun University, entitled Sahih al Bukhari Muqaranah Turathiyyah wa Ru’yah Mu’asarah.

^[88]  Al Khatib al Baghdadi: Tarikh Baghdad, 2/355 onwards. Refer to the story mentioned by al Dhahabi in al Siyar, 12/406, wherein it is mentioned that one of the leaders wrote to al Bukhari about a need and he supplicated a lot for him. Al Bukhari wrote back stating:

سلام عليك فإني أحمد إليك الله الذي لا إله إلاهو أما بعد وصل إلي كتابك وفهمته وفي بيته يؤتى الحكم والسلام

Peace be upon you. I praise Allah before you, besides Whom there is no Deity. Thereafter, your letter reached me and I understood it. In his house judgement is passed. Wa al Salam.

^[89]  Except one hadith mentioning al ‘Abbas, which al Bukhari narrated in the book of merits under the chapter of the mention of al ‘Abbas ibn ‘Abdul Muttalib radiya Llahu ‘anhu. He did not say ‘chapter on the merits of al ‘Abbas,’ as is his custom in that book. It is the famous hadith from Anas radiya Llahu ‘anhu that when there was a drought, ‘Umar ibn al Khattab would seek rain through al ‘Abbas ibn ‘Abdul Muttalib and say:

اللهم‏ إنا كنا نتوسل إليك بنبينا صلى الله عليه وسلم فتسقينا وإنا نتوسل إليك بعم نبينا فاسقنا قال فيسقون

O Allah, we used to beseech to You through our Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and You would give us rain. Now we beseech You through the uncle of our Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, so give us rain.

He said that then they would receive rain. (Sahih al Bukhari, book on merits of the Companions, chapter on the mention of al ‘Abbas ibn ‘Abdul Muttalib radiya Llahu ‘anhu, Hadith: 3710.)

This hadith does not indicate to any special merit for him from the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam or for his progeny and their Caliphate.

^[90]  Ahmed: al Musnad, Hadith: 1786; al Hakim: al Mustadrak, Hadith: 5482, from Ibn Ma’in; Ibn ‘Adi: al Kamil, 8/477, from Ahmed ibn Muhammad ibn Yahya ibn Sa’id al Qattan, all of them from ‘Ubaid ibn Abi Qurrah. It is a da’if hadith as will be mentioned in al Bukhari’s statement. See its referencing in al Musnad.

^[91]  Al Bukhari: al Tarikh al Kabir, 6/2.

^[92]  Nuaim ibn Hammad: Kitab al Fitan, chapter on the emergence of the Abbasids, 1/201–214; Ahmed: al Musnad, Hadith: 22387. It contains the hadith of Thawban who said:

قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم إذا رأيتم الرايات السود قد جاءت من قبل خراسان فأتوها فإن فيها خليفة الله المهدي

The Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam said, “When you see the black flags coming from Khurasan, then go to them, for the Khalifah of Allah al Mahdi is among them.”

Sheikh Shu’ayb stated its isnad to be da’if.

^[93]  Ibn Abi Shaybah narrated in al Musannaf, Hadith: 38882, from Muawiyah ibn Hisham — ‘Ali ibn Salih — Yazid ibn Abi Ziyad — from Ibrahim — from ‘Alqamah — from ‘Abdullah ibn Mas’ud radiya Llahu ‘anhu who said:

بينا نحن عند رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم إذ أقبل فتية من بني هاشم فلما رآهم النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم اغرورقت عيناه وتغير لونه قال فقلت له ما نزال نرى في وجهك شيئا نكرهه قال إنا أهل البيت اختار لنا الله الآخرة على الدنيا وإن أهل بيتي سيلقون بعدي بلاء وتشريدا وتطريدا حتى يأتي قوم من قبل المشرق معهم رايات سود يسألون الحق فلا يعطونه فيقاتلون فيضرون فيعطون ما سألوا فلا يقبلونه حتى يدفعوا إلى رجل من أهل بيتي فيملؤها قسطا كما ملؤوها جورا فمن أدرك ذلك منكم فليأتهم ولو حبوا على الثلج

While we were with the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, some young men from the Banu Hashim approached. When the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam saw them, his eyes swelled with tears and his colour changed. I said to him, “We see something in your face that we dislike?”

He said, “We, the Ahlul Bayt, have been chosen by Allah for the Hereafter over this world. Indeed, after me, my family will encounter affliction, eviction, and expulsion, until some people will come from the east with black flags asking for the rights but they will not be given. Then they will fight and cause harm, and they will be given what they had asked but they will not accept it until they hand it over to a man from my family, who will fill it with justice as they filled it with injustice. Therefore, whoever among you witnesses that, he should go to them, even if he has to crawl on snow.

Similarly, Ibn Majah narrated it from Muawiyah ibn Hisham. The criticism in it is on Yazid ibn Abi Ziyad. He was denounced by the former scholars, such as Waki’ ibn al Jarrah, who said:

يزيد بن أبي زياد عن إبراهيم عن علقمة عن عبد الله يعني حديث الرايات ليس بشيء

Yazid ibn Abi Ziyad — from Ibrahim — from ‘Alqamah — from ‘Abdullah—i.e. the hadith of the flags—is nothing.

Al ‘Uqayli narrated it in al Du’afa’, 4/380. Al ‘Uqayli also quoted the following statement of Imam Ahmed regarding this hadith of Yazid:

ليس بشيء

It is nothing.

Likewise, he quoted the statement of Abu Usamah Hammad ibn Usamah:

لو حلف عندي خمسين يمينا قسامة ما صدقته أهذا مذهب إبراهيم أهذا مذهب علقمة أهذا مذهب عبد الله

If he swore fifty oaths of Qasamah (oath taken by the family of a murdered person) in front of me, I would not believe him. Is this the mazhab of Ibrahim? Is this the mazhab of ‘Alqamah? Is this the mazhab of ‘Abdullah?

^[94] Ahmed narrates in al Musnad, Hadith: 22387:

حدثنا وكيع عن شريك عن علي بن زيد عن أبي قلابة عن ثوبان قال قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم إذا رأيتم الرايات السود قد جاءت من قبل خراسان فأتوها فإن فيها خليفة الله المهدي

Waki’ narrated to us — from Sharik — from ‘Ali ibn Zaid — from Abu Qilabah — from Thawban who said that the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam said, “When you see the black flags coming from Khurasan, then go to them, for among them is the Khalifah of Allah, al Mahdi.”

It is a da’if hadith as confirmed by Sheikh Shu’ayb in his commentary on al Musnad.

^[95]  Abu al Faraj al Asbahani: Maqatil al Talibiyyin, pg. 366.

^[96]  Al Bukhari: al Sahih, Hadith: 3701, 3707.

^[97]  Al Bukhari: al Sahih, Hadith: 3701, 3707.

^[98]  Al Bukhari: al Sahih, Hadith: 3711, 3716.

^[99]  Al Bukhari: al Sahih, Hadith: 3746, 3753.

^[100]  Al Bukhari: al Sahih, Hadith: 2699.

^[101]  Al Bukhari: al Sahih, Hadith: 3706.

^[102]  Al Bukhari: al Sahih, Hadith: 2699.

^[103]  Al Bukhari: al Sahih, Hadith: 3702.

^[104]  Al Malati: al Tanbih wa al Radd, pg. 25, Abu Nuaim al Isfahani: al Imamah wa al Radd ‘Ala al Rafidah, pg. 221; Ibn Hazm: al Fasl, 4/78; al Ghazali: Fada’ih al Batiniyyah, pg. 136.

^[105]  Al Bukhari narrated it in his al Sahih, book on laws, chapter on Muhammad ibn al Muthanna narrated to us, Hadith: 7222, 7223, from Jabir ibn Samurah, who said:

سمعت النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم يقول يكون اثنا عشر أميرا فقال كلمة لم‎ أسمعها فقال أبي إنه قال كلهم من قريش

I heard the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam say, “There will be twelve leaders.”

Then he said a sentence that I did not hear, so my father notified that he said, “All of them will be from the Quraysh.”

It is in Sahih Muslim, book on leadership, chapter on people are followers of the Quraysh and the Caliphate is in the Quraysh, Hadith: 1821, with the wording:

لا يزال الإسلام عزيزا إلى اثني عشر‎‏خليفة ثم قال كلمة لم أفهمها فقلت لأبي ما قال فقال كلهم من‎ قريش

Islam will remain strong until twelve Khalifas’. Then he said something that I did not understand, so I asked my father, “What did he say?”

He replied, “All of them will be from the Quraysh.”

^[106]  This is what al Bukhari narrated in his al Sahih, book on the sick, chapter on the sick person saying, “Get up and leave me.” Hadith: 5669. He said:

حدثنا إبراهيم بن موسي حدثنا هشام عن معمر وحدثني عبد الله بن محمد حدثنا‎ عبد الرزاق أخبرنا معمر عن الزهري عن عبيد الله بن عبد الله عن ابن عباس رضي الله عنهما قال لما حضر رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم وفي البيت رجال فيهم عمر بن الخطاب قال النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم هلم أكتب لكم كتابا لا تضلوا بعده فقال عمر إن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم قد غلب عليه الوجع وعندكم القرآن حسبنا كتاب الله فاختلف أهل البيت فاختصموا منهم من يقول قربوا يكتب لكم النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم كتابا لن تضلوا بعده ومنهم من يقول ما قال عمر فلما أكثروا اللغو والاختلاف عنده قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم قوموا قال عبيد الله فكان ابن عباس يقول إن‏ الرزية كل الرزية ما حال بين رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم وبين أن يكتب لهم ذلك الكتاب من اختلافهم ولغطهم

Ibrahim ibn Musa narrated to us — Hisham narrated to us — from Ma’mar; and ‘Abdullah ibn Muhammad narrated to me — ‘Abdur Razzaq narrated to us — Ma’mar told us — from al Zuhri — from ‘Ubaidullah ibn ‘Abdullah — from Ibn ‘Abbas radiya Llahu ‘anhuma who said: When the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam was on his deathbed and there were people in the house, among whom was ‘Umar ibn al Khattab, the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam said, “Come, let me write a statement for you so that you will not go astray after it.”

‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu said, “The Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam is overcome by pain and you have the Qur’an. The Book of Allah is sufficient for us.”

The people of the house began to differ and argue. Some of them said, “Give the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam so he may write for you a letter after which you will not go astray.”

Meanwhile some of them were saying what ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu said. When their idle talk and disagreement increased in his presence, the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam said, “Go away from me.”

‘Ubaidullah states, “Ibn ‘Abbas would say, ‘The greatest misfortune was what prevented the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam from writing that letter for them, due to their disagreement and idle talk.’”

^[107]  Refer to Hadith: 2699, 2911, 3091, 3110, and many others. Refer to his previous statement, chapter on the merits of the relatives of the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and the merits of Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anhu, the daughter of the Prophet. Refer to al Tarikh al Kabir, 1/45, 232, 2/355. I find it farfetched that this was done by scribes because it is mentioned in more than one book, although the possibility of that remains, and I cannot deny it with certainty.

^[108]  Like ‘Abbad ibn Yaqub al Rawajini. See his biography and extremism in al Dhahabi: Siyar A’lam al Nubala’, 11/536–538. Some details will come in due course.

^[109]  Al Dhahabi believes this hadith to be mutawatir according to what Ibn Kathir quoted from him in al Bidayah wa al Nihayah, 7/681:

قال أي الذهبي وصدر الحديث متواتر أتيقن أن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم قاله وأما اللهم وال من والاه فزيادة قوية الإسناد

Al Dhahabi said, “The beginning of the hadith is mutawatir; I am certain that the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam said it. As for ‘O Allah, love whoever loves him’, it is an addition with a strong isnad.”

Then I found the text of al Dhahabi regarding it to be mutawatir in Siyar A’lam al Nubala’, 8/334-335. After mentioning this hadith with his isnad from ‘Abdullah ibn Muhammad ibn ‘Aqil, he said:

كنت عند جابر في بيت وعلي بن الحسين ومحمد ابن الحنفية وأبو جعفر فدخل رجل من أهل العراق فقال أنشدك بالله إلا حدثتني ما رأيت وما سمعت من رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم فقال كنا بالجحفة بغدير خم وثم ناس كثير من جهينة ومزينة وغفار فخرج علينا رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم من خباء أو فسطاط فأشار بيده ثلاثا فأخذ بيد علي رضي الله عنه فقال من‏ كنت مولاه فعلي مولاه

I was with Jabir in a house, along with ‘Ali ibn al Hussain, Muhammad ibn al Hanafiyyah, and Abu Jafar, when a man from Iraq entered and said, “I ask you by Allah to tell me what you saw and heard from the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam.”

He said, “We were in al Juhfah at Ghadir Khumm, along with many people from Juhaynah, Muzaynah, and Ghifar. Then the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam came out to us from a tent or a pavilion and gestured three times with his hand. Then he took the hand of ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu, and said, ‘Whoever’s mawla I am, ‘Ali is also his mawla.’”

Al Dhahabi said that this is a hassan and a very high hadith and its text is mutawatir.

^[110]  Ibn Hajar: Fath al Bari, 7/74.

^[111]  Pg. 405–414.

^[112]  Al Bukhari: al Tarikh al Kabir, 1/375.

^[113]  Al Bukhari: al Tarikh al Kabir, 4/193.

^[114]  Refer to the chapter that Dr. Ahmed ‘Abdullah wrote in his book Manhaj al Imam al Bukhari fi al Ta’lil min Khilal Kitabihi al Tarikh al Kabir (Imam al Bukhari’s Methodology of Ta’lil through his book al Tarikh al Kabir) about his criticism of texts, which is the third chapter, ‘Ilal of the text through al Tarikh al Kabir, pg. 415–497.

^[115]  Al Hakim states in Ma’rifat ‘Ulum al Hadith, pg. 59:

فإذا وجد مثل هذه الأحاديث بالأسانيد الصحيحة غير مخرجة في كتابي الإمامين البخاري ومسلم لزم صاحب الحديث التنقير عن علته ومذاكرة أهل المعرفة به لتظهر علته ‏ وما زال الأمر يحتاج تنقيبا ودراسة

If such ahadith are found with sahih isnad that are not narrated in the books of the two Imams: al Bukhari and Muslim, it is necessary for the Hadith scholar to investigate its ‘illah and discuss it with those who have knowledge of it, to reveal its ‘illah. The matter still requires investigation and study.

^[116]  Al Mizzi: Tahdhib al Kamal, 14/178-179. Al Dhahabi states in Siyar A’lam al Nubala’:

إسنادها صحيح وما أدري كيف تسمحوا في الأخذ عمن هذا حاله وإنما وثقوا بصدقه

Its isnad is sahih. I do not know how they permitted taking from someone like this, but they declared him thiqah due to his truthfulness.

^[117]  Al Mizzi: Tahdhib al Kamal, 14/178. This book has his name as al Rawajibi, which is a distortion. The correct name is al Rawajini.

^[118]  I.e. combined with other narrations. Al Bukhari: al Sahih, Hadith: 7534; Ibn Hajar: Hady al Sari, pg. 412.

^[119]  Ibn Hajar: Hady al Sari, pg. 412.

^[120]  Al Dhahabi: Siyar A’lam al Nubala’, 11/536.

^[121]  Ibn Hajar: Taqrib al Tahdhib, pg. 291 (3153).

^[122]  Al Bukhari: al Tarikh al Kabir, 1/56.

^[123]  Al Bukhari: Khalq Af’al Al ‘Ibad, pg. 29-46. I have not mentioned this benefit in the previous research and I benefited from it from Professor ‘Abdullah al Thallaj, hence, all thanks to him.

^[124]  Ibn Hibban: al Sahih, 1/152-154.

^[125]  Ibn Hibban said in al Thiqat, 6/217, in the biography of Hammad ibn Salamah:

ولم ينصف من جانب حديثه واحتج بأبي بكر بن عياش في كتابه وبابن أخي الزهري وبعبد الرحمن بن عبد الله بن دينار فإن كان تركه إياه لما كان يخطىء فغيره من أقرانه مثل الثوري وشعبة ودونهما كانوا يخطئون فإن زعم أن خطأه قد كثر من تغير حفظه فقد كان ذلك في أبي بكر بن عياش موجودا وأنى يبلغ أبو بكر حماد بن سلمة ولم يكن من أقران حماد مثله بالبصرة في الفضل والدين والعلم والنسك والجمع والكتبة والصلابة في السنة والقمع لأهل البدعة ولم يكن يثلبه في أيامه إلا قدري أو مبتدع جهمي لما كان يظهر من السنن الصحيحة التي ينكرها المعتزلة وأنى يبلغ أبو بكر بن عياش حماد بن سلمة في إتقانه أو في جمعه أم في علمه أم في ضبطه

He was not just regarding his Hadith and cited from Abu Bakr ibn ‘Ayyash, the nephew of al Zuhri, and ‘Abdur Rahman ibn ‘Abdullah ibn Dinar in his book. If he left him out because he would make mistakes, then others of his peers, such as al Thawri, Shu’bah, and others also made mistakes. If he claimed that his mistakes increased due to changes in his memory, then that was present in Abu Bakr ibn ‘Ayyash also. How could Abu Bakr reach Hammad ibn Salamah, whereas there was no one amongst the peers of Hammad like him in Basrah in virtue, din, knowledge, piety, compilation, writing, steadfastness on the Sunnah, and suppression of innovators. No one in his time would defame him except a Qadari or a Jahmi innovator, because of the authentic Sunnah that he displayed, which the Mu’tazilah denied. How can Abu Bakr ibn ‘Ayyash reach Hammad ibn Salamah in his mastery, his compilation, his knowledge, or his accuracy?

When he wrote the biography for ‘Abdur Rahman ibn ‘Abdullah ibn Dinar al Madani in al Majruhin, 2/51, he mentioned his mistakes and that it is not permissible to use his narrations as evidence if he narrates isolated. Then, condemning al Bukhari, he said:

وكان محمد بن إسماعيل الجعفي البخاري ممن يحتج به في كتابه ويترك حماد بن سلمة

Muhammad ibn Ismail al Ju’fi al Bukhari was one of those who inferred through him in his book while he left out Hammad ibn Salamah.

It is as if al Bukhari’s abstention from Hammad ibn Salamah, in particular, was the subject of a long discussion among the Imams of the scholars. Al Khalili (d. 446 AH) mentioned in al Irshad, 1/416, that he once discussed with some of the Huffaz of Hadith, asking:

البخاري‏ لم يخرج حماد بن سلمة في الصحيح وهو زاهد ثقة فأجابه ذلك الحافظ بجواب متعلق بطريقة حماد في الرواية

Al Bukhari did not narrate from Hammad ibn Salamah in his al Sahih, whereas he is an ascetic and thiqah. That Hafiz answered him with an answer related to Hammad’s method of narration.

Regardless of the correctness and strength of his answer, the issue remained in the circle of discussion for a long time.

^[126]  See for example Ibn Hajar: Hady al Sari, pg. 514; Fath al Bari, 6/400, 8/35, 90. It contains quotations that show al Ismaili’s criticism of some of al Bukhari’s work in his al Sahih. Refer to some details of his criticism and the criticism of the Muhaddithin in the third and fourth centuries by Hamzah al Bakri: Mawqif al Muhaddithi al Qarnayn al Rabi’ wa al Khamis min Sahih al Bukhari wa Atharuhu fi Talaqqihi bi al Qabul (The Stance of the Muhaddithin of the Fourth and Fifth Centuries on Sahih al Bukhari and its effect on its Acceptance), 2/81-84. It is a research which is printed in the book Sahih al Bukhari Muqarabah Turathiyyah wa Ru’yah Mu’asarah (Sahih al Bukhari: A Heritage Approach and a Contemporary Vision).

^[127]  Ibn Hajar: Hady al Sari, pg. 346. Refer to Tadrib al Rawi and the commentary of it by our teacher Sheikh Muhammad ‘Awwamah, 2/505-512.

^[128]  Ibn Hajar: Hady al Sari, pg. 346, where he mentioned 110. It contains the criticisms of al Daraqutni and others. The number of what al Bukhari was criticised for does not exceed 100 in my opinion.

^[129]  According to the order of Hady al Sari.

^[130]  Hadith: 1, pg. 348; Hadith: 4, pg. 351; Hadith: 9-10, pg. 352-353; Hadith: 17, pg. 355-356; Hadith: 19, pg. 356; Hadith: 20, pg. 357.

^[131]  Hadith: 2, pg. 350; Hadith: 3, pg. 350; Hadith: 8, pg. 352; Hadith: 13, pg. 354; Hadith: 14, pg. 354-355; Hadith: 16, pg. 355.

^[132]  Hadith: 7, pg. 352; Hadith: 12, pg. 354; Hadith: 18, pg. 356.

^[133]  Hady al Sari, Hadith: 6, pg. 352, Hadith: 20, pg. 357.

^[134]  Hadith: 15, pg. 355.

^[135]  Hadith: 5, pg. 351.

^[136]  Hadith: 18, pg. 356.

^[137]  See for example Hadith: 2, pg. 350; Hadith: 13, pg. 354; Hadith: 14, pg. 355.

^[138]  See: Hadith: 9, pg. 352-353, then see his statement in al ‘Ilal, 10/349:

والحديث عندي حديث ابن أبي ذئب والضحاك بن عثمان لأن للحديث أصلا محفوظا عن سلمان يرويه أهل الكوفة

The hadith, in my opinion, is the hadith of Ibn Abi Dhi’b and al Dahhak bin ‘Uthman because the hadith has a preserved origin from Salman, narrated by the people of Kufah.

^[139]  Hadith 8, pg. 353.

^[140]  This is a summary of a research I presented at the History of Civilisational Sciences in Islam Conference held at Ibn Khaldun University on 2019/12/20-21. It was titled Tarikh al Musannafat al Hadithiyyah fi al Qarnayn al Rabi’ wa al Khamis: al Mustakhrajat Namudhajan Muqarabah Jadidah (History of Hadith compilations in the fourth and fifth centuries: extracts as an example, a new approach) in which I mentioned this idea and scrutinised it. It had been burning in my mind during my days teaching the course of Hadith referencing, science of narrators and important discussions with students at our university in the spring of 2019.

^[141]  Sahih al Bukhari, book on Battles, chapter on the Battle of Tabuk, which is the Battle of difficulty, Hadith: 4416. He also narrated it at another place, book on the merits of the Companions, chapter on the merits of ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib, Hadith: 3706; Sahih Muslim, book on the merits of the Companions, chapter on the merits of ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib radiya Llahu ‘anhu, Hadith: 2404.

^[142]  Sahih al Bukhari, book on etiquettes, chapter on what is suspicion, Hadith: 6067-6068.

^[143]  Ibn Taymiyyah: Minhaj as-Sunnah, 7/215.

^[144]  Refer to the study by Dr. Jumu’ah Fathi ‘Abdul Halim: Riwayat al Jami’ al Sahih wa Nusakhuhu Dirasah Nazariyyah Tatbiqiyyah (Narrations of Sahih al Bukhari and its Copies: A Theoretical and Applied Study), and the study by Dr. Shifa’ al Faqih: Riwayat al Jami’ al Sahih li al Imam al Bukhari Riwayat Abi Dharr al Harawi Namudhajan (Narrations of Sahih al Bukhari: The Narration of Abu Dharr al Harawi as an example).