Do you clarify for us the issue of disagreement between al-Bukhari and Muslim regarding the condition of established hearing?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : The issue raised a moment ago is the disagreement between al-Bukhari and Muslim regarding the issue of hearing.
The Shaykh : Yes
The questioner : It has not become clear up to now.
The Shaykh : to
The questioner : It was not clear.
The student : It is not clear; your speech did not mean anything.
The questioner : If you repeat it.
The Shaykh : It is not clear.
The questioner : Yes
The Shaykh : I am the narrator and this is my shaykh; I say, "So-and-so said," or "I mention to you from so-and-so." Is this narration connected or disconnected?
Some people stipulate that for it to be connected, let us suppose that you are al-Bukhari, meaning Muhammad ibn Isma'il al-Bukhari. You stipulate that for my narration from this person to be valid, it must be established with you that I did not merely live in the same era as him, but that I met him, gathered with him, and heard from him. Is this clear?
The questioner : Clear, yes.
The Shaykh : Now, this is Muslim al-Qushayri. He is content with connection, provided the condition of connection is met. The connection between me and this shaykh is that we are contemporaries; it is established historically that we are contemporaries. This does not require the condition you stipulated, which is that it be established with him, as it is established with you, that I met him and heard from him. However, he stipulates one condition, which is what I mentioned earlier: contemporaneity, meaning the possibility of hearing from him and the possibility of meeting him. Are you following up to this point?
The questioner : Yes
The Shaykh : But on the condition that I am not known for concealment (tadlis) with him, because the habit of one who conceals is that he narrates from those from whom he heard as well as those from whom he did not hear. So, if I am not known for concealment with this Imam Muslim—and I do not say "not a concealer," but "not known for concealment"—perhaps you distinguish between the two phrases, so you do not say later that we are scattered, east and west. I am saying that he stipulates that I am not known for concealment with him. In that case, my narration from this person is considered connected. As for you, you do not accept the claim of connection except on the condition that I have met him before. So you do not suffice with my being his contemporary. The difficulty is resolved.
The questioner : Yes
The Shaykh : Praise be to Allah.
The questioner : Regarding the concealment (tadlis) you mentioned, Shaykh, in the definition.
The Shaykh : Yes
The questioner : It has not become clear up to now.
The Shaykh : to
The questioner : It was not clear.
The student : It is not clear; your speech did not mean anything.
The questioner : If you repeat it.
The Shaykh : It is not clear.
The questioner : Yes
The Shaykh : I am the narrator and this is my shaykh; I say, "So-and-so said," or "I mention to you from so-and-so." Is this narration connected or disconnected?
Some people stipulate that for it to be connected, let us suppose that you are al-Bukhari, meaning Muhammad ibn Isma'il al-Bukhari. You stipulate that for my narration from this person to be valid, it must be established with you that I did not merely live in the same era as him, but that I met him, gathered with him, and heard from him. Is this clear?
The questioner : Clear, yes.
The Shaykh : Now, this is Muslim al-Qushayri. He is content with connection, provided the condition of connection is met. The connection between me and this shaykh is that we are contemporaries; it is established historically that we are contemporaries. This does not require the condition you stipulated, which is that it be established with him, as it is established with you, that I met him and heard from him. However, he stipulates one condition, which is what I mentioned earlier: contemporaneity, meaning the possibility of hearing from him and the possibility of meeting him. Are you following up to this point?
The questioner : Yes
The Shaykh : But on the condition that I am not known for concealment (tadlis) with him, because the habit of one who conceals is that he narrates from those from whom he heard as well as those from whom he did not hear. So, if I am not known for concealment with this Imam Muslim—and I do not say "not a concealer," but "not known for concealment"—perhaps you distinguish between the two phrases, so you do not say later that we are scattered, east and west. I am saying that he stipulates that I am not known for concealment with him. In that case, my narration from this person is considered connected. As for you, you do not accept the claim of connection except on the condition that I have met him before. So you do not suffice with my being his contemporary. The difficulty is resolved.
The questioner : Yes
The Shaykh : Praise be to Allah.
The questioner : Regarding the concealment (tadlis) you mentioned, Shaykh, in the definition.