[sisuarmalmicy]

http://www.livingislam.org/k/whb_e.html

The short formula "whether the Sahihayn are or not 100% sahih" remains tenuous and misleading, for the Umma far and wide - meaning the Consensus of the Fuqaha' generation after generation - have been satisfied that they are.

This conclusion excludes the chainless, broken-chained reports, or unattibuted reports sometimes adduced by al-Bukhari in his chapter-titles or appended to certain narrations. An example of the latter is the so-called "suicide hadith" - one of al-Zuhri's unattributive narrations (balaghat) which is actually broken-chained and therefore weak. It does not meet the criteria of hadith authenticity used by the lesser and greater hadith Masters, much less that of al-Bukhari who mentioned it only to show its discrepancy with two other chains whose versions omit the attempted suicide story, and Allah knows best.

The above conclusion is proof that the position that everything that is found in the two Sahihs is rigorously sound refers only to full-chained reports positively attributed to the Prophet , and Allah knows best. I don't get it. This is not what I have always known!

Is he right?

[CalBettaulp]

http://www.livingislam.org/k/whb_e.html



I don't get it. This is not what I have always known!

Is he right?

Imam Bukhari uses chainless ahadith as the titles for chapters of his Sahih. The actual body of his work contains no weak ahadith.

[Phassetus]

السلام عليكم

As the brother said, Bukhari is Sahih but sometimes he quotes weak narrations purposely to compare between them and between the similar Sahih narrations in terms of Matn as the above text mentioned.

So no problem at all.

[sisuarmalmicy]

السلام عليكم

As the brother said, Bukhari is Sahih but sometimes he quotes weak narrations purposely to compare between them and between the similar Sahih narrations in terms of Matn as the above text mentioned.

So no problem at all.

So how would I know which ones are weak? And isn't calling it Sahih al-Bukhari a bit misleading?

[BloofPailafum]

http://www.livingislam.org/k/whb_e.html



I don't get it. This is not what I have always known!

Is he right?

Dear Brothers, Assalaamoalaikum

To my logical mind, this is an important issue. I have for quite some time been aking myself how can "sahih - meaning "true" (hope I am right) could be weak or "strong". In particular, it is important to have a plausible explanation as in discussions of aqeedah, very often a hadith is qualified as weak to prove one's point or to prove that the point being made by one of a different aqeedah is wrong.

Our brothers ,maneatinglizard and Tripoli Sunni, have offered one explanation - namely that the weak ahadiths were used by Imam al-Bukhari (May Allah(SWT) Be Pleased With him) as chapter titles and as a means of comparison between weak and sahih ahadiths. However, I believe that there are two basic questions to answer:

1. Was it Imam al-Bukhari ((May Allah(SWT) Be Pleased With him) himself who qualified his collection as Sahih or was this done by subsequent hadith scholars?

2. Did Imam al-Bukhari himself say that he used weak ahadiths as chapter titles in his work or that he included these for comparison purposes, or was this said by subsequent hadith scholars?

Jazakallah for any brother who has studied the Hadith Discipline to enlighten us.

Brotherly yours
farook

[Phassetus]

السلام عليكم

First of all this book is not for laymen, it's made for scholars.

Secondly the book is not called "Sahih al-Bukhari", the name of the book is "الجامع الصحيح المسند من حديث رسول الله وسننه وأيامه" "al-Jami'i al-Sahih al-Musnad min Hadith Rassulullah wa Sunanihi wa Ayyamihi"

Which technically implies that the statements that aren't musanad aren't necessarily authentic.

For details ask scholars of Hadith.

[BloofPailafum]

Dear Brothers, Assalaamoalaikum

To my logical mind, this is an important issue. I have for quite some time been aking myself how can "sahih - meaning "true" (hope I am right) could be weak or "strong". In particular, it is important to have a plausible explanation as in discussions of aqeedah, very often a hadith is qualified as weak to prove one's point or to prove that the point being made by one of a different aqeedah is wrong.

Our brothers ,maneatinglizard and Tripoli Sunni, have offered one explanation - namely that the weak ahadiths were used by Imam al-Bukhari (May Allah(SWT) Be Pleased With him) as chapter titles and as a means of comparison between weak and sahih ahadiths. However, I believe that there are two basic questions to answer:

1. Was it Imam al-Bukhari ((May Allah(SWT) Be Pleased With him) himself who qualified his collection as Sahih or was this done by subsequent hadith scholars?

2. Did Imam al-Bukhari himself say that he used weak ahadiths as chapter titles in his work or that he included these for comparison purposes, or was this said by subsequent hadith scholars?

Jazakallah for any brother who has studied the Hadith Discipline to enlighten us.

Brotherly yours
farook

Dear Brothers, Assalaamoalaikum

The questions asked are direct and unambiguous questions that require direct answers. In fact, the answers could simply be YES or NO.

Brotherly yours
farook

[sisuarmalmicy]

Lets say we accept that there are some weak narrations in there; why don't we hear about this more often? 99.9% of ahlul sunnah will say that Bukhari is 100% sahih. How did we get to that stage? Don't we need to tell more people about this?

[freddystone]

So how would I know which ones are weak? And isn't calling it Sahih al-Bukhari a bit misleading? Not at all, the reason you might be a little confused is because you may not understand Arabic, if you do you would should have read Hady al-Sari which is a introduction to Bukhari's Sahih by Ibn Hajar. He addresses all these questions and more.

1. Was it Imam al-Bukhari ((May Allah(SWT) Be Pleased With him) himself who qualified his collection as Sahih or was this done by subsequent hadith scholars? It was the Imam himself and also his peers who recognized not only the importance of its work but also his breadth and erudition.

[BloofPailafum]

Have you read the link I posted. Without reading the link, there is no point even asking this. The problem lies with defective understanding plaguing the laymen muslims with no appreciation of complex sciences of fiqh, hadith etc of today.
Know this not All hadith is Sunnah but all sunnah are illuminated in hadith. Hadith being sahih does not make it acceptable to act upon if it violates the law. hadith masters /muhadith are like phramacist, and Muftis or Faqih are like sergent. This is why laymen follows school of jurisprudance.
Their role are different. Anyway go through the link and find out the relation between Fiqh and hadith. It is sheer ignorance to assume that entire deen is only in 6000+ statment of hadith.

Dear Brother, Assalaamoalaikum

Brother Jive is not addressing the issue of fiqh and hadith. He wishes to know whether all the hadiths in Sahih al-Bukhari (subject to the observation made by our brother TripolySunni regarding the title of the book) are sahih or not.

Let me put the question in another way.

It is my understanding that Imam al-Bukhari (May Allah (SWT) Be Pleased with him) collected some 600,000 narrations, memorised some 200,000 of them, sifted through all his collection, spent a whole life deciding which ones to include in his final compilation, performed Istikhara Salaah (whenever he had doubts, I believe), included narrations that look contradictory or containing different messages on one and the same subject (indicating his sincerity and honesty), not to mention other precautions he took in accepting narrations from someone - and finally ending up with 7563 narrations.

Would it still be possible that he knowingly included some "weak" hadiths in his compilation?

This is the question being asked by our Brother Jive.

Brotherly yours
farook

[TubOppomo]

Dear Brother, Assalaamoalaikum

Brother Jive is not addressing the issue of fiqh and hadith. He wishes to know whether all the hadiths in Sahih al-Bukhari (subject to the observation made by our brother TripolySunni regarding the title of the book) are sahih or not.

Let me put the question in another way.

It is my understanding that Imam al-Bukhari (May Allah (SWT) Be Pleased with him) collected some 600,000 narrations, memorised some 200,000 of them, sifted through all his collection, spent a whole life deciding which ones to include in his final compilation, performed Istikhara Salaah (whenever he had doubts, I believe), included narrations that look contradictory or containing different messages on one and the same subject (indicating his sincerity and honesty), not to mention other precautions he took in accepting narrations from someone - and finally ending up with 7563 narrations.

Would it still be possible that he knowingly included some "weak" hadiths in his compilation?

This is the question being asked by our Brother Jive.

Brotherly yours
farook

Good question. But what is 'weak' hadith?

I mean to say, how do you classify it?

I understood it to mean a tradition that did not meet the condition for inclusion in his compilation. And as a student some years ago, I heard in a seminar that Imam Bukhari included hadith, for which the chain of transmission had a few weak narrators, but were supported when he included the same hadith with a strong chain of transmission (in a different chapter of his sahih compilation). Maybe the more learned br's and sr's could confirm that one way or another.


Allah Knows Best