Is it a condition that al-Bukhari and Muslim agree, or not?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : Do their conditions coincide or not?
The Shaykh : They may coincide, as we have said, and they may differ. One of the most prominent issues in which one of them differs from the other is that Imam al-Bukhari conditions the narration of a narrator from his shaykh that it be established that he met him. As for Imam Muslim, he is content with the narration of a narrator from his shaykh if he was a contemporary of him, meaning that their contemporaneity is established between them, and he does not condition what Imam al-Bukhari conditioned, which is the establishment of meeting. However, Imam Muslim conditions, in addition to that, that this narrator who narrated from his shaykh, where he is content with contemporaneity, not be known for tadlis (concealment of a defect in a chain). Because if a muddallis (one who conceals defects) narrates from someone known to be his contemporary, his hadith is not relied upon in that case unless he explicitly states that he heard it or that he was informed of it. This is one of the clearest examples of where they differ.The Shaykh : So there is no doubt that al-Bukhari’s condition of contemporaneity is more precise and more correct for hadith than Imam Muslim’s condition. But from another perspective, this condition that Imam al-Bukhari imposed is difficult to fulfill in all authentic hadiths. Therefore, the opinion of the majority of hadith scholars who came after them is to rely on Imam Muslim’s condition. If Imam al-Bukhari’s condition is found, it is light upon light; and if it is not found, it is still light, and one should be guided by every light. There is also a known difference among the people of hadith regarding narrators: a narrator may be considered trustworthy (thiqah) by al-Bukhari but not by Imam Muslim, so al-Bukhari relies on his hadith while Muslim does not. Or the reverse may occur, where Imam Muslim considers him trustworthy while al-Bukhari does not. There are many examples of this, such as Abu Bakr ibn Abi Umayyah, whom Imam al-Bukhari relies on while Muslim does not. And conversely, Hammad ibn Salama, not Hammad ibn Zayd al-Azdi; Hammad ibn Zayd al-Azdi is agreed uponThe Shaykh : to be relied upon, but Hammad ibn Salama is relied upon by Imam Muslim alone, without al-Bukhari. So if a hadith comes with a chain in which all its men are on the condition of the two Shaykhs except Hammad ibn Salama, it is not said that this hadith is on the condition of the two Shaykhs, but rather that it is on the condition of Muslim alone. And if another hadith comes containing Abu Bakr ibn Abi Umayyah, where all its men are trustworthy menThe Shaykh : below him, it is not correct to say that it is authentic on the condition of the two Shaykhs, but rather that it is authentic on the condition of al-Bukhari only. Likewise, there are some conditions in which they differ and others in which they agree.
Yes.
The Shaykh : They may coincide, as we have said, and they may differ. One of the most prominent issues in which one of them differs from the other is that Imam al-Bukhari conditions the narration of a narrator from his shaykh that it be established that he met him. As for Imam Muslim, he is content with the narration of a narrator from his shaykh if he was a contemporary of him, meaning that their contemporaneity is established between them, and he does not condition what Imam al-Bukhari conditioned, which is the establishment of meeting. However, Imam Muslim conditions, in addition to that, that this narrator who narrated from his shaykh, where he is content with contemporaneity, not be known for tadlis (concealment of a defect in a chain). Because if a muddallis (one who conceals defects) narrates from someone known to be his contemporary, his hadith is not relied upon in that case unless he explicitly states that he heard it or that he was informed of it. This is one of the clearest examples of where they differ.The Shaykh : So there is no doubt that al-Bukhari’s condition of contemporaneity is more precise and more correct for hadith than Imam Muslim’s condition. But from another perspective, this condition that Imam al-Bukhari imposed is difficult to fulfill in all authentic hadiths. Therefore, the opinion of the majority of hadith scholars who came after them is to rely on Imam Muslim’s condition. If Imam al-Bukhari’s condition is found, it is light upon light; and if it is not found, it is still light, and one should be guided by every light. There is also a known difference among the people of hadith regarding narrators: a narrator may be considered trustworthy (thiqah) by al-Bukhari but not by Imam Muslim, so al-Bukhari relies on his hadith while Muslim does not. Or the reverse may occur, where Imam Muslim considers him trustworthy while al-Bukhari does not. There are many examples of this, such as Abu Bakr ibn Abi Umayyah, whom Imam al-Bukhari relies on while Muslim does not. And conversely, Hammad ibn Salama, not Hammad ibn Zayd al-Azdi; Hammad ibn Zayd al-Azdi is agreed uponThe Shaykh : to be relied upon, but Hammad ibn Salama is relied upon by Imam Muslim alone, without al-Bukhari. So if a hadith comes with a chain in which all its men are on the condition of the two Shaykhs except Hammad ibn Salama, it is not said that this hadith is on the condition of the two Shaykhs, but rather that it is on the condition of Muslim alone. And if another hadith comes containing Abu Bakr ibn Abi Umayyah, where all its men are trustworthy menThe Shaykh : below him, it is not correct to say that it is authentic on the condition of the two Shaykhs, but rather that it is authentic on the condition of al-Bukhari only. Likewise, there are some conditions in which they differ and others in which they agree.
Yes.
Source
www.al-albany.com
The Arabic text is copied verbatim from the original source, without any edits.