The Shaykh's clarification of the issue of disagreement between al-Bukhari and Muslim regarding the condition of meeting.
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Raise your voice.
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 yet, O Shaykh.
The Shaykh : To.
The questioner : It has not become clear.
Another questioner : It is not clear, it is not clear, where was your speech, I mean?
The questioner : If you could repeat it, O Shaykh.
The Shaykh : Is it not clear?
The questioner: No.
The Shaykh : Yes.
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? According to some, it is assumed to be connected. Let us assume that you are al-Bukhari—meaning "Muhammad ibn Isma'il al-Bukhari"—you condition 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 : It is clear, yes.
The Shaykh : Good; this is "Muslim al-Qushayri." He is satisfied with connection by one condition: connection. I and this Shaykh are contemporaries, and it is established from history that we are contemporaries, so he does not condition what you conditioned, which is that it be established with him as it was established with you that I met him and heard from him. However, he conditions one condition, which is what I mentioned earlier: contemporaneity; meaning the possibility of hearing from him and the possibility of meeting him; are we following up to here?
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : But on the condition that I am not known to him as a deceiver; because the habit of the deceiver is that he narrates from those from whom he heard what he did not hear from them. So if I am not known to this Imam Muslim as a deceiver—and I do not say "not a deceiver"; I say "not known as a deceiver"; perhaps you distinguish between the two expressions?
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : What do you say after that, that we scattered and confused and muddled things! I am saying that it is conditioned of him that I am not known to him as a deceiver, so at that time he takes my narration from this person as connected. As for you, you do not accept the claim of connection except on the condition that I met him before, and you are not satisfied with the fact that I lived in the same era as him. Is the difficulty resolved?
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : Praise be to Allah.
The questioner : Regarding the deception you mentioned, O Shaykh, in history.
The Shaykh : I said...
The Shaykh : Raise your voice.
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 yet, O Shaykh.
The Shaykh : To.
The questioner : It has not become clear.
Another questioner : It is not clear, it is not clear, where was your speech, I mean?
The questioner : If you could repeat it, O Shaykh.
The Shaykh : Is it not clear?
The questioner: No.
The Shaykh : Yes.
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? According to some, it is assumed to be connected. Let us assume that you are al-Bukhari—meaning "Muhammad ibn Isma'il al-Bukhari"—you condition 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 : It is clear, yes.
The Shaykh : Good; this is "Muslim al-Qushayri." He is satisfied with connection by one condition: connection. I and this Shaykh are contemporaries, and it is established from history that we are contemporaries, so he does not condition what you conditioned, which is that it be established with him as it was established with you that I met him and heard from him. However, he conditions one condition, which is what I mentioned earlier: contemporaneity; meaning the possibility of hearing from him and the possibility of meeting him; are we following up to here?
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : But on the condition that I am not known to him as a deceiver; because the habit of the deceiver is that he narrates from those from whom he heard what he did not hear from them. So if I am not known to this Imam Muslim as a deceiver—and I do not say "not a deceiver"; I say "not known as a deceiver"; perhaps you distinguish between the two expressions?
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : What do you say after that, that we scattered and confused and muddled things! I am saying that it is conditioned of him that I am not known to him as a deceiver, so at that time he takes my narration from this person as connected. As for you, you do not accept the claim of connection except on the condition that I met him before, and you are not satisfied with the fact that I lived in the same era as him. Is the difficulty resolved?
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : Praise be to Allah.
The questioner : Regarding the deception you mentioned, O Shaykh, in history.
The Shaykh : I said...
Source
www.al-albany.com
The Arabic text is copied verbatim from the original source, without any edits.