the Hadith “a Muslim's Salat (prayer) would be cut off by [the passing of] a woman, a donkey and a dog"  
This is one of the Sahih Hadiths.  
Some people reject this Hadith and believe that it insults women, putting them in the same level of dogs and donkeys.  
Before judging, approach the doctors of Hadith and ask them about its meaning.  
The special friends of "Morabaa", Alsalamu Alikom.  
I am Hatim Alnajjar presenting to You "Morabaa" by "Thamania"  
Hadith, Sunnah, Albukhary  
These are importnant topics that always occupy my mind  
Twitter controverises, books, articles either ignore the importance of Sunnah and abide only by Quran  
or those who doubt the soundness of Albukhary's work  
Some also defend him, defend Sunnah, and how it is important  
we refer back to 1400 years ago to the sayings and acts of Prophit Mohammed (PBUH)    
How did they reach us?  
How do we make sure that they are sound  
How did Albukhary memorize thousands of Hadiths?  
Why do we trust him?  
Science of narrators "Biographical Evaluation" is a scientific, logical approach  
Some orientalists and non-muslims described it as one of the most great approaches by humans in this field  
What is that approach by which Muslims validated the Hadiths of their Prophet transmitted by narrators?  
It is always challenging to address religous topics  
"Morabaa" is not a channel for lecturs  
I am not specialised in Sharia  
but I strongly believe that "Morabaa" seeks to positively affects the scociety, and improving the qulity of life.  
Religion is the essence of Muslims' lives  
and Sunnah comprises a major part of it.  
That's why this topic is important  
and it's important to understand it well.  
The topic itself is astonishing, how muslims validated the the transmission of Hadith.  
The story of continuous great efforts throughout hundreds of years.  
Our guest today is Dr. Baraa halawani  
Professor at Umm Al-Qura University.  
Majored in Hadith and its sciences  
He took us in a journey that lasted for 3 hours, yet he described it as a brief in this topic.  
I am sure that Dr. Baraa covered most of the issues that might come to your mind  
and that after listening to this interview, you will understand so many aspects of Sunnah and Hadith  
The approache of Albukhary, his story, and so many other topics.  
I hope that you like this interview.  
Enjoy it our friends!  
Welcome!  
Thank you.  
It is our pleasure to have you with us!  
May Allah bless you. It is my pleasure to meet you and your tem.  
Ever since the start of this show, I wanted to hear more about the science of Hadith.  
The more you learn about it, the more astonished you will be of some of its details which we will address together Insha Allah.  
First of all, I want to know why did you choose the science oof all the other Sharia siences  
Good question.  
It takes us a little bit off of this interview's topic.    
Actually, I don't always prefer to talk about myself  
I was raised by honorable parents  
They were keen on learning  
When I was a kid, we used to have in our house a library with different books.  
Different scientific religous books were in this library.  
I loved reading alot.  
During the intermediate school years, some of the books in the library attracted me, so I started reading them more than usual.   
The books that I used to read were "The Series of Authentic Hadiths",   
and "The Series of Weak Hadiths" by Sheikh Al-Albani.  
which are a multi-volume compilation  
I used to read them when I was in the first year of Intermediate school.  
What attracted me was the rich knowledge of Alalbani, how he compiled the Hadiths.  
how he evaluated the Hadiths and the narrators  
how he referred to written and printed  resources.  
All of that astonished me as a kid.  
I used to read in different fields,  
but that field strongly motivated me and   
It changed somehow my position towards my future major  
After the Intermediate school years, I was thinking of majoring in Sharia in general, specifically the Science of Hadith.  
So what attracted me to this field is a reading in the past.   
It introduced me to this field.  
I realized when I majored in that field that it was worthy of my scientific curiosity when I was a kid.  
I always wonder when I see someone of a very young age is being keen of scientific readings  
What intrigued you during that time to do that; you had other options  
You could've played football  
Well, I used to play football!  
Well, I was not confined to one field.  
I used to read and play. I read in the various fields.  
I am into reading since I was a kid.  
I used to read novels, scientific books. I even read history books.  
For example, some of my readings at that time were two huge volumes about the First and Second World War.  
Also, I read a book about the history of Mecca  
I read as well my mother's books on Psychology  
My father is a military officer. May Allah protect our parents.  
I used to read books on Criminal Psychology, Forensic science  
I used to read on different fields as I was a young reader so to speak.  
Actually, I was interested in so many fields.  
But this field is the one that really motivated me to learn more  
It piqued my curiosity.  
I majored in this field for that reason, realizing the great importance of religious knowledge.  
Although none of your parents were majored in Sharia!  
I thought that they were majored in Sharia sciences!  
Well! of course Sharia is always there.  
But if you're asking whether they were academically educated on Sharia.. Well, they are not.  
But as I said before, my parents, May Allah protect the, have good knowledge of Sharia   
They acquired it independently.  
By the way, Shaikh Al-Albani's book was rarely found at any house library back then.  
It is not there in almost every house compared to "The Meadows of the Righteous" book  
It is a specialized book  
So, besides other fields, my parents clearly paid much attention to Sharia  
My parents brought us up in a house ruled by Sharia.  
So since the middle school years you were attracted to this field  
That's right.  
After my graduation from the middle school "regular schooling",  
I started looking for a way to enrich my knowledge during the high school years.  
So I enrolled in the Scientific Institute which is affiliated to Imam Mohammad Ibn Saud Islamic University.  
Back then, the scientific institutes were affiliated to to Imam Mohammad Ibn Saud Islamic University.  
They were specialized institutes that offer advanced Sharia courses.  
Students usually enroll in such institutes starting from the middle school.  
But since I studied in a regular middle school, I enrolled in the institute during my high school years.  
After that, I started asking about which department offers such courses in the ancient university of Umm Al-Qura in Mecca  
Later I learned that it is the Department of Quran and Sunnah.  
So, I majored in the Department of Quran and Sunnah,  
and I have completed my bachelor's degree.  
Then, I earned my master's and PhD in Hadith Sciences.  
So, I believe that I and others who are still lost and can't determine their academic passion at a young age would wonder  
I can't get it! how people at a young age would be determined about their future goals  
Are there any drawbacks of being dtermined about it at a young age?   
I mean, have you ever thought during your university study about changing your major,   
lets say changing it to the Principles of Islamic jurisprudence  
Or even to Engineering or Medicince  
Were you determined about your major since the middle school?  
Yes!   
Before deciding to enroll to the Institute during high school,   
and before deciding on specializing in Sharia,  
My passion was different regarding my studies and future job  
It was completely not related to Sharia.  
Late in middle school, I always dreamt of being a pilot  
My uncle, may Allah protect him, is a captain pilot  
I even used to ask him about this field and read about it  
But later, I was attracted more to Sharia  
So, I decided to major in it  
However, after majoring in Sharia, I never thought about changing my major,  
or even regret it. The answer to your question would differ from one person to another.  
I was determined about my major and I was prepared for its consequences which were not easy.  
For example, before completeing my bachelor studies, I wanted to work in the academic field.  
I enrolled in the master's program although I was not admitted as a university teaching assistant  
I was only admitted to the academic field after 5 years of my graduation from the master's.  
During those 5 years, I had other options,   
I could've worked in the general education field instead of the academic path  
I had so many options, but I knew what I wanted and I sought it out.  
 I was ready for the consequences of my decision; I waited for 5 years before my admission.  
Alhamdulillah. Allah helped me to reach where I am now.  
Concerning the 2 approaches of learning; learning independently  
and the academic institutional learning,  
what are the most prominant differences between the 2?  
independent learning  
I may divide the methods of learning into 2;  
the first is independent learning  
the second is the instituational academic learning where we admit to schools, colleges and universities.  
The second type is important as it saves your time.  
It offers you the opportunity to learn from the experts in the field who may help you.  
However, learning through the second type alone is not enough, it is only an enabler.  
You must try and show some efforts along with that enabler to excel in that field;  
otherwise, you might not achieve what you want.  
So, there are advantages in both types of learning methods  
independent learning is very imprtant  
it is important also to read, attend extra classes, contact the experts in the field.  
All of these independent learning techniques are very helpful.  
ٍEventually, the 2 types are complementary to each other.  
Welcome again!  
Our topic today is rich  
I don't know how long would the interview last  
I believe it would be long  
So lets start. Bismillah  
Bismillah.  
Lets dive into the topic.  
The topic of Sunnah.  
We've got the Holy Quran,  
the greatest book ever throughout history.  
It's the protected book by Allah.  
From it, we get our Islamic teachings.  
So, why is Sunnah very important?  
and why is it authoritative?  
That'a a good introductory question.  
Its answer might be a little bit long.  
What is Sunnah?  
There are different definitions  
But I prefer not to talk about its definitions and the conflicts over them;  
instead, I would like to talk about the main thing here which answers your question  
Allah the Almighty has created mankind different than the others  
He created mankind and jinn with religious duties to perform.  
They are distinguished with their brain and have the power of free will.  
He created them to perform their duties.  
He forbade us from somethings.  
He promised to reward those who abide by his orders with Jannah.  
But those who disobey him will be punished accordingly.  
That's in general.  
We mankind and jinn are different than other creatures  
Allah has created them with an instinct that would lead them to the right path.   
Then, Allah has sent his prophets, beginning with the father of them all Adam.  
However, humanbeings go through different eras,  
they tend to forget a lot, mistake, listen to Satan's whispers.  
The human soul is prone to evil.  
Humans interact with each other.  
All of these factors would eventually lead to deviations from one time to another.  
Such deviations require guidance.  
Who is responsible of such guidance?  
They are the prophets.  
Allah the Almighty sends them down as bringers of glad tidings and warners.  
Why is that?  
So that mankind might have no argument against Allah after the messengers.  
We need those messengers so they show us the right path.  
How could they do that?  
A messenger is sent down by Allah carrying a message  
A messenger with a message.  
What is that message?  
What is it that Allah wants from his creatures?  
Those creatures that are ordered to perform his duties?  
What are those duties?  
That is briefly the message they carry.  
Eventually, a messenger would deliver this message of these duties to mankind.  
He would explain it to them in the best way.  
If they listen to him and correct their path, then the message succeeded Alhamdulillah.  
Otherwise, another messenger would be sent to correct that path  
This is how all prophets and messengers were sent, from Adam to Mohammed (PBUH).  
So prophets are sent by Allah to clarify the duties.  
Sometimes they deliver the message of those duties through heavenly books,  
such as the Torah, the Gospel, the Psalms, the Scrolls of Abraham  
as well as the Quran, the last and the greatest of them all.  
The message of duties may be delivered through another means;  
other than the heavenly books.  
Well, a messenger would be sent with some duties mentioned in the book, if he was sent with a book.  
He may deliver duties that were not mentioned in the book;  
that is usually the case when he is sent to complete what a previous messenger started.  
So, is there only one source of duties?  
Yes! From Allah  
Allah the Almighty is the only source of duties.  
Such duties may either be clarified through a book or by other means.  
This is the case with all the prophets.  
Allah has sent Moses with the Torah, therein was guidance and light,  
the great heavenly book.  
Yet, Allah orderd Moses to inform his people of other duties that weren't mentioned in the Torah.  
How is the case with Jesus?  
When Mose was sent to them, he informed them of the duties as ordered by Allah;  
"Allah commands you to slaughter a cow"  
It's an order by Allah which was not mentioned in Torah,  
Moses delivered that order to them; is that order one of the duties? yest it is.  
The order, "make your houses [facing the] qiblah" is a duty which was not mentioned in the Torah as well.  
This is the case with all the prophets  
That is what I call the unrecited revelation;  
we've got the recited revelations which are the scriptures,  
and the unrecited revelations that occurred with all the prophets.  
Did it also occurr with Prophet Mohammed? Yes!  
(Say, "I am not something original among the messengers)  
When it comes to this point, Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) is not different than the other prophets  
He was sent with the Quran, the eternal book, the miracle.  
He came with revelations from Allah the Almighty which were not mentioned in the Quran.  
So, where did Sunnah come from?  
That's a question sometimes asked by some people.  
They ask about the source of Sunnah.  
Actually, Sunnah is a revelation that came in in two ways;  
How is Sunnah a revelation?  
Sunnah that entails the duties and islamic orders set by Allah the Almighty in order for us to abide by them are revealed in two ways:  
it is either revealed directly; i.e., revealed by Gabriel to Prophet Mohammed (PBUH),  
that revelation is not mentioned in the Quran; Gabriel would convey the orders of Allah to Mohammed.  
The other means is by the indirect revelation. What do we mean by that?  
Well! the Prophet (PBUH) would infer from the Quran an Islamic rule, ordering his people to abide by it.  
Prophet Mohammed (PBUH), the most knowing of all scholars, the most knowing of Quran and Allah the Almighty, would employ Ijtihad (i.e., independent reasoning) in some matters.  
In this case, Allah the Almighty would either correct his Ijtihad,  
or approve it.  
Should Allah the Almighty approve it, then it is considered a revelation by Allah's approval.  
Otherwise, Allah would send his revelation to correct the Prophet's Ijtihad, which only happened rarely.  
Thus, we would know the position of the revelation regarding this Ijtihad.  
Eventally, from both the unrecited revelation through Gabriel as well as the approved Ijtihad of the Prophet, we would get the Sunnah,  
the Sunnah which complements the duties mentioned in the Quran.  
So, that is the source of Sunnah.  
I apologize for taking so long, but I wanted to make things clear.  
So based on all what I've mentioned before, If you ask me from where do we get the Sunnah? I will tell you it is from Allah.  
Would it be possible to ignore Sunnah? No!  
Well, the Sunnah completes the duties revealed in Quran.   
No one would doubt that, maybe only a few people would.  
Well, all of these events, the revelations, sayings, and actions happened before 1400 years ago.  
Islam is the only religion that asserts it is the last heavenly religion.  
So no religion would come after it.  
Now, it has been 1400 years, in the future if Allah wills, it could be 10 thousands years.  
the question is, how do we make sure that the Sunnah, which is not the Quran, is transmitted soundly throughout the years.  
Interesting,   
By the way, a lot of religions assert that they are the last religion.  
I meant the heavenly religions.  
Even the heavenly religions.  
For example, the Jewish people claim that their religion is the last;  
and they don't believe the prophets who came after their religion as Jesus and Mohammed.  
The Christians as well say that their religion is the last; they don't believe in Mohammed (PBUH).  
So it is not about what we claim, it is about the evidences we provide that support our claims.  
We've got evidences.  
So, yes, our religion is the last one;  
It is revealed by Allah the Almighty for all mankind as the seal of all prophets and religions.   
We've got our conclusive evidences that support this claim.  
Anyway, this is not our topic today.  
the question is, how do we make sure that what reached us is the same as what reached the ones before.  
e.g., someone told me once that   
if he lived in the time of Mohammed (PBUH), listening to his orders and watching his actions, he wouldv'e surely complied with the Sunnah.  
Yet, he said that after 1400 years how could I validate what reached us of Sunnah.  
It is a nice question and it is ok to ask it.  
To answer this question, we need to know how did the Sunnah reached us.  
As we said before, Sunnah is a revelation to Mohammed (PBUH) by Allah the Almighty either directly or indirectly.  
How did such revelations transmitted to the Companions of the Prophet, the ones that followed them, then to the people of this time?  
how did it transmit to the time Al-Bukhari before 1200 years?  
I would take so long to answer this question.  
Generally, through the different interactions between Mohammed (PBUH) and his people at that time, he used to inform them of Sunnah by various means;  
the means could by delivering Friday sermons, offerring his lessons and sessions,   
It could be also through going out with his people, answering a companion's question, commenting on something he saw, or eveng going out to the market  
so many defferent means.  
We are talking about human interactions across 23 years.  
Through such interactions, we learned about the direct and indirect revelations manifested in Sunnah that complements and clarify the teachings in Quran.  
Eventually, the Companions received both Quran and Sunnah  
We are talking about tens of thousands of Companions;  
The number of companions of men who battled in the expedition of Tabuk reached 30 thousand;  
What about the number of women, children, the men who could not fight, and the men who stayed in Madina to guard it.  
It is estimated that the number of companions who participated in the farewell Hajj reached 100 thousand.  
Thus, generally speaking, the tens of thousands of those companions are the ones who received Sunnah from Prophet Mohammed (PBUH).  
After receiving it, they transmitted it to the ones that followed them  
Prophet mohammed (PBUH) passed away in the 11 year of Hijrah.  
After his death, the Sunnah we've just talked about was known by the hearts of the companions.  
Did they write it? well, most of them didn't.  
During the life of Mohammed (PBUH), the writing of Sunnah was very rare and limited.  
Was it there? Yes it was, but it was limited.  
Someone might ask, why was it limited? Why not depend on it?  
The most important question is why didn't they write it? I don't know if we could cover this question later.  
The other question is, did they not write it voluntary, or is it because of an order not to?  
Well, I said before that they did write a few parts of it; the writing was limited.  
Did the Prophet (PBUH) know that they used to write it?  
Yes!  
The position of Mohammed (PBUH) was very clear pertaining the writing of anything about Sharia other than Quran  
There are so many Hadiths that clarify his position (PBUH).  
One of such Hadiths is that "the Prophet (PBUH) forbade his companions to write the Sunnah",  
most of the narrated hadiths pertaining this position are weak, exept the one mentioned in Sahih Muslim that says:  
Abu Sa'id Khudri reported that the Prophet (PBUH) said: "Do not take down anything from me, and he who took down anything from me except the Qur'an, he should efface that" as clear as that.  
On the other hand, there are so many Hadiths of the acts and sayings of the Prophet that allow writing.  
Give us an example.  
For example, one of the last Sahih Hadiths says that when Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) was giving his very long farewell sermon to more the 100 thousand people,  
he addressed the most important topics for the muslims,   
one of the attendees was one of the companions whose name is Abu Shah,  
Abu Shah was of Persian origin.  
Abu Shah was one of the attendees; he approached the Prophet after the sermon has finished; he said O Messenger of Allah, I want someone to write for me the sermon.  
I want to keep with me what you have just said,  
I couldn't memorize what you've just said [maybe because he is not Arabic].  
When he said I want a writing of the sermon, the Messanger of Allah orderd someone to write for him.   
Another example is what happened with Abdullah ibn Amr ibn Al-As, a young, strong, religious, educated, literate man who memorized Quran.    
He started writing the Hadiths of Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) during the life of Mohammed.  
He approached the Prophet and asked him: Could I write everything you say?  
He replied: "You could write everything I say".  
He said: Even when you are angry or happy?  
He replied: "Even if I am angry or happy".  
Then the Prophet (PBUH) pointed to his tongue and said: “By Him in Whose Hand my soul is, this [tongue] would not utter anything but the truth".  
These are some Hadiths that clarify the spoken position of the Prophet regarding the writing of Sunnah.  
There are also other Hadiths that clarify his postion by action.  
For example, the letters sent by Mohammed (PBUH) to other nations and to muslims from far regions.  
Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) has sent Amr Ibn Hazm, one of the Ansar companions to Najran to teach them about Sunnah as its people had just converted to Islam.  
He wrote to him a letter of many different Islamic Sharia teachings to order its people to comply to them.  
We do have the book now and it is narrated. The companion's sons delivered it to us; we have it in the records of Sunnah.  
That Letter is written by the Prophet (PBUH); from the Prophet to him.  
The letter addressed  Sharia rules such as Zakat and othe teachings  
For more details on it, you can search for the letter by typing "Amr Ibn Hazm Letter" and you will find it.  
That is not the only letter; there are almost 26 letters sent by the Prophet (PBUH).  
That is according to the book by ibn Tulun, whose work is one of the great works by the scholars who cared for Sunnah;  
The scolars of Sunnah compiled books tackling the letters by Mohammed (PBUH)  
In ibn Tulun's book, he compiled the 26 letters, although there are more than that.  
In his book, he wrote those letters as they are, and he clarified who were their recipients. We have this book now.  
So the Prophet used to deliver his words to one of the companions?   
Yes! It is a letter, and the Prophet had his own writers who would write the revelations and other things.  
So, we can see from the words and actions of the Prophet (PBUH) that his position is clear regarding the writing of Sunnah.   
The Hadiths clarify that he allowed the writing, except the Hadith narrated by Abu Sa'id Khudri.  
We will get back to that Hadith as we want to discuss the contradictions between some Hadiths in Sahih Albukhari.  
So, there were writings of Sunnah during the life of Mohammed (PBUH) with him knowing.  
When did the extensive writings start?  
Well, generally, the companions agreed on the approval of writing, but for them it was a matter of personal preference.   
Dr. Azmi, who passed away, wrote a very huge book, which I think was his PhD thesis on the studies of the writing of Sunnah.  
In his book, he counted 52 companions who wrote Hadiths after or before the death of Mohammed (PBUH). They kept their writings.  
The interesting thing is that a number of them were among the companions who did not prefer the the writing of Sunnah.  
Abu Sa'id Khudri (RA) who narrated the Hadith on the forbidding of writing, which was mentioned in Sahih Muslim, did not prefer that his students write Sunnah and depend on the writing.  
However, he was one of the companions who wrote some Hadiths of the Prophet!  
We should understand that strange position by understanding the context back then.  
Back then, the tools of writing were not always available like today.  
Today, if I want to write thousands of pages, I just head to the stationary and buy a number of papers and pens to write.  
It was not just as easy as that back then.  
They used to write with the any tool they had; animals' skin, and sometimes bones.  
During and after the life of Mohammed (PBUH), some parts of Quran used to be written  sometimes on bones and skins.  
The tools of writing were limited.  
Most of the Arabs back then were illiterate or beginners in writing and reading.  
Also, they had a strong memory that enables them to memorize what they want to; generally like poems and lectures and specifically like Quran and religious texts.  
That's why so many companions preferred not to write, yet transmit the Sunnah by memorizng it.  
Since they were good in memorizing, they preferred that they and their students memorize it.  
Some companions would clearly tell their students: Memorize as we were memorizing.  
Unlike today, we can't do it without writing,  
However, writing has its pros and cons.  
Writings could be edited altered, deleted or lost.  
On the other hand, memorizing texts and knowing them by heart could be protected if revised well.  
In this case, no one could change what you've memorized.  
That's why, in the first Hijri century,  a number of companions and the ones who followed them [although they were not many who did] preferred to transmit Sunnah by knowing it by heart.  
But I would like to assert that they used to transmit it verbally and sometimes, yet rarely, through writing.  
Why didn't they transmit it by writing?  
Some people say that they ignored writing Sunnah because it was not important to them, which is not true.  
It was their choice only. Just as if I want to travel from Jeddah to Riyadh; I either go by plane or bus, the choice is mine to make.  
They made their choice based on their circumstances.  
Surely, they cared the most for Sunnah, how to transmit it, teach it, and comply to it.  
Well, the numbers of companions who used to narrate and transmit Sunnah are very high.  
ِA few hundred of the companions lived across different cities, although most of them lived in Medinah at first.  
Some of them lived across the Amsar, yet, they used to transmit the Sunnah to the ones that followed them.  
So they would transmit it as: "I heard the Prophet (PBUH) saying" or "I saw the Prophet doing"  
Eventually, the ones who followed them received from them that Sunnah.  
In that phase, the writing would occur more than before.  
In the second half of the first Hijri century, the attempts of writing Sunnah started during that early phase.  
So this is the 3rd generation, we've got the companions first, then the followers...  
Actually we call them the chief Followers of the Companions.  
During that phase, the attempts of writing started very early.  
Interestingly, there were so many books that were written during that phase.  
Some of these writings were in the form of diaries, some of them were related to a specific science. So, the writings were there.  
In one of his books, Dr Hatim Alshareef, my thesis supervisor, critically and accurately studied the books that were there since the begining of Islam.  
One of the first books is by Urwa ibn Al-Zubayr Ibn Al-Awwām  
You mean books of Hadith?  
Yes. I mean anything written about Sharia other than Quran, including Sunnah, Sira, Islamic duties and laws, and the interpretations of the Quran.  
And the news of the city?  
No, I only mean the Sharia topics.  
ok, then you mean the sayings and acts of the Prophet.  
Yes, that's right.  
So, according to dr. Hatim, the first writing on Sira and the Prophet's expeditions is by Urwa ibn Al-Zubayr Ibn Al-Awwām.  
He was one of the chief followers, and he passed away in the 93th of Hijrah.  
So it is early.  
Yes.  
Dr. Hatim calculated the books written in a specific period, starting from the beginning of the third century AH and ending before the time of Albukhari.  
He found out that there were 99 books of 99 authors during that early period.  
These books transmitted the Sunnah.  
I wanted to assert that because some  would think that the people since the time of Mohammed transmitted Sunnah only verbally for 200 years, and then Albukhari started the writing;  
which is completely not true.  
But rather, there were so many Sharia books during that period.  
There were also some Hadith copies;  
A narrator would show his students his book that has so many Hadiths,  
his students would copy his book and revise their copies with him by reading it.  
Such Hadith copies are a lot.  
Dr. Bakr Abu Zayd found 270 Hadith copies; they were with the narrators.  
Each copy would carry their name.  
His students would could collect them, then write it down.  
For example, lets say that you're my Sheikh; I would get a copy of your narrations from the other students to copy it by hand. Then, I would read to you my copy for revision to get your approval.  
That's the way Hadith copies were done.  
Al-Bukhari and Muslim used in their books more than 36 small Hadith copies.  
They used in their books as well tens of books from the ones before them, the books that we discussed before.  
To summarize, the transmission of Sunnah during the life of Mohammed (PBUH) was mostly orally,  
After that, some parts of Sunnah were written gradually.  
Then the writing was more active in the middle of the second half of the first century.  
Then, the process of writing was more prominent; both transmission by writing and the oral transmision were present.  
The narrators would get the narrations, both from the books and by receiving it from others orally, and transmit them.  
Eventually, the Sunnah would be transmitted from one generation to another.  
Interesting. There are thousands of the Prophet's companions, companions followers, narrators, books, and copyists.  
What is the level of agreement among the narrations by those thousands?  
For example, one Hadith on the sayings or acts of the Prophet (PBUH), was usually not witnessed by one person, nor it was narrated to only one person.  
So, for one Hadith, what is the level of agreements among the different sources.  
Before answering your question, I would like to correct 2 points.  
The first point is that the Prophet did not necessarily deliver his Sunnah to a group of people;  
We said before, the Hadith could be an answer to a question.  
It could be also that 3 for example witnessed the Hadith, then 2 of them passed away during the life of Mohammed; only 1 was able to transmit the Hadith.  
So, it is not always the case that all those who witnessed the hadith must get together to transmit the Hadith.  
To answer your question, we should consider the geometric progression to examine the transmission of Hadith.  
The geometric progression is more like an ascending triangle.  
In other words, Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) is one person delivering a Hadith.  
Then, 4 people would hear it from him and transmit it.  
1 of those 4 transmitted the Hadith to 2 followers.  
The 2nd of the 4 witnessers of Hadith transmitted it to 5; the 3rd transmitted it to 3; the 4th transmitted it to 10.   
Then those who received the narrations would transmit it to their followers; possibly each one would transmit it to a different number of people.  
Should it goes like this, you possibly would find on the 4th line of the triangle that those who transmitted the Hadith reached 300-400.  
And they possibly would be from different cities: Baghdad, Basra, Medina.   
That's right.  
That geometric progression was one of the difficulties that encountered the scholars of Islam when studying the transmission of Sunnah.  
The had to validate the Hadiths as they could be either sound or false.  
That's why it is imortant to employ critical validation of Hadith.  
So, the 1st line of the triangle consists only of the Companions, yet after 100 years, you would have 3 lines of narrators;  
thus, the validation of Hadith would be more difficult since it is more likely for mistakes to occurr.thus, the validation of Hadith would be more difficult since it is more likely for mistakes to occur.  
Therefore, since the 1st century and with the start of transmitting Sunnah, the tools- for critically evaluating the authenticity of Hadiths- witnessed a great advance among Islam scholars.  
Immediately.  
I believe that the level of trust of the companions would change from one generation to another.  
Of course, the necessity leads to more attention for that field.  
During the life of Mohammed, the process of Hadith validation is easy.  
If someone transmitted a false Hadith during the Prophet's life, the Prophet could be approached to validate the authenticity of the Hadith.  
However, after his death, the validation process is more complicated.  
That's why during the life of the companions, the main issue and question asked regarding the validation of Hadith was:   
Did you hear that narration from the companion yourself?  
What is the jurisprudence of that narration?  
How could we infer the islamic teachings from that narration?  
That were the questions at that time.  
So, the issues back then were not as complicated as later.  
However, that situation changed once a large number of people converted to Islam, and they started transmitting Hadiths from the companions.  
Moreover, so many old companions had passed away either naturally or in battles.  
Therefore, it was necessary at that time to closely validate the narrations.  
That's why the Companions themselves were careful with Hadith narration process.  
They would ask each other: From who did you transmit that Hadith? Don't just transmit any narration.  
Ibn Abbas (RA) told us about that.  
He said: During the early times of Islam,  "We would listen to a man saying, ‘the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) said…’ with our eyes rushing towards him." We would not doubt his words.  
However, that situation changed; more issues ocurred.  
Sometimes, it was difficult to know how well some people would memorize; how fair they were. It was necessary to validate that.  
Because of that, it was necessary to raise the standards of critisizm.  
How did they raise the standards for those men?  
Allow me please to address another point.  
Despite our words which are not flawless; although they are scientifically proven,  
One of the non-muslim orientalists said:  
"The science of Hadith and the science of narrators are very unique and great sciences that the muslims have, and the muslims should be proud of them".  
Are they really that great?  
Dr. Abdulrahman Alsulami has published an interesting book.  
In his book, he compared between the narrators criticism approach and the historical critical method which is popular among the western schools.  
Whether we are muslims or not, it is necessary to validate the news we hear using a criticism method.  
So, Dr. Abdulrahman compared between the narrators criticism approach and the historical critical method.  
His book is a well-know published book.  
He concluded that all the standards in the historical critical method are included in the narrators criticism approach;  
but rather, the narrators raised the standards and added to the historical critical method more conditions.  
They raised the standards and passed hadiths through the criticism filter to make sure that no false Hadiths are narrated  
Such a unique and great approach for criticism!  
I will try to give you a brief on it,  
Giving you a brief would require an extensive detailed study.  
You mentioned before the "science of Hadith" and the "science of narrators".   
Is there a similar science with a specific, clear approach on how to pass the Hadiths from one stage to the other?  
Yes! I referred to it as "criticism filter" and that's its name.  
Actually, the narrator's' criticism filter has 5 stages;  
Any news should pass all the 5 for the news to be validated and approved by the narrators.  
Who are the narrators? Where do they stand on the line of the companions and followers?  
Are they anyone who narrates Hadiths?  
Well, the criticism filter is not applied by anyone.  
The critics are experts and advanced in the science of Hadith, just like how the critics in the other fields should be.  
I will get back to your question later,  
but first, I would like to give you a brief on the criticism filter.  
News received could be either true or false.  
The false news could either be delivered deliberately by someone who is dishonest, seeking to change the facts;  
or it could be done indeliberately by someone who forgot, erred, or heard the news incorrectly from someone els.  
Well, What did the narrators do to avoid both situations of false news?  
Pay attention to the filters used for Hadith criticizm.  
First, a Hadith critic should examine each man on the chain of transmission;  
each man should meet the following: First, he should be honorable, the narrators would call him "just".    
In other words, he should be religiously conservative, honest, not known for his immorality, nor for his foolishness.  
He should not be known for lying, he should be honorable.  
Why being honorable is important? It is to avoid those who would deliberately lie.  
Is being honorable enough? No it isn't. the first condition is not enough.  
It wouldn't be enough even if all those in the chain are honorable (i.e, religious, honest, pious, just)  
They could be honorable, but possibly they could be prone to forget which happens a lot.  
That's why the narrators set the second condition on the criticism filter.  
Besides being honorable, he should be of strong memory, transmitting exactly what he received.  
It is important to ensure that in order to avoid the indeliberate mistakes.  
Would that be enough? Of course not.  
Even if he were an honorable man with a strong memory, he could be mistaken once or twice which is something inevitable.  
What did the narrators do to avoid that issue?  
Well, they set a third condition.  
They said that the transmission [Isnad] should be connected like a chain, each narrator on the chain received from his successor in the right way.  
Why is that? To avoid any gaps among the narrators; the gap could be filled by an unkown narrator.  
We need to make sure that the chain is well-connected.  
The Isnad would go like this: Ali narrated that Abdullah narrated that ...  
It's just like the line of ancestors that would go like this: A son of B son C ...  
It is the same for the narration. It goes like: A narrated that B narrated that C narrated..  
Those narraters chould be connected from the start to the end.  
Each one of them should be honorable, of strong memory, and should receive from their successors in the right way and the chain should be well connected to avoid discontinuity of the chain of narration  
So, he must've sit with the narrator and listened to it himself?  
I'm just saying that it should be received in the right way.  
Where does the Isnad end?  
It end with the Prophet (PBUH).  
Would that be enough? of course not. There comes the 4th condition.  
In order to avoid mistakes, narrators would examine the narrators in the Sanad.  
Let me make this more clear. Albukhari would narrate a Hadith narrated by Abdullah Bin Alzubair Alhumaidi on the authority of Sufian bin Oyayna, on the authority of Yahya bin Saeed Alansari .. and the rest of the Hadith.   
In order to make sure that Alhumaidi did not mistake in his narration, I need to check the students of his Shaikh and whether they narrated the same Hadith or not.  
Who was his Sheikh? He was Sufyan bin Auyayna.  
Abdullah Bin Alzubair Alhumaidi was one of his top students, but was he the only one? No.  
There were many other students. Did they narrate that Hadith as he did?  
Were there any additions in the narration of Abdullah which were not mentioned in the narrations of the other students?  
Are there any differences?  
How close was the narrator to the Sheikh?  
The narrators were not on the same level; some of them might have sat with their Sheikh for 2 days only, others might have been with their Sheikh for 30 years.   
So how close was the narrator to the Shiekh?  
Would it be possible that he received that narration specially from his Sheikh without the involvement of the other students?  
This is how close and carefully they examined the narrator to make sure that no undeliberate mistake occurred.  
So they would do the same with every narrator on the chain of transmission [isnad].  
In addition to all of that, the 5th condition should be examined.  
The Hadith should not be defective.  
The defect is like an illness. it could be external like a wound or an injury and you can diagnose it once you see it.  
On the other hand, there are hidden internal illnesses. You might see someone as very healthy, but internally, they might suffer from an incurable disease.  
Is that possible? Yes it is.  
The same goes with narrations.  
If you check a narration, you would find it sound; however, once the doctors of Hadith examine it, they would detect a hidden defect that you couldn't see by having an external look.  
That issue would make the Hadith defective.  
Narrators call that defective: An obscure, hidden reason which blemishes the authenticity of a Hadith although it appears sound.  
That's why, narrators closely examine the details of Hadith.  
The 2nd and 4th type are not easily recognized by anyone.  
Therefore, only a few narrator critics are able to major in or detect defective Hadiths.  
Like Al-Albani?  
Although he was a contemporary.  
Yes! the more you are being an expert in Hadith and well-equipped with right approach of Hadith criticism tools, the more you would excel in it.  
Because you would have explored a wide range of different Hadiths.  
Therefore, one of the most important tools considered by the narrators is   
to examine as much as they could a wide range of narrations from the Prophet (PBUH).  
Narrations of the same Hadith?  
Yes!  
Just for you to know,  
Imam Al-Bukhari, I will discuss about him later, composed his book "Sahih Al-Bukhari" as a brief book.  
His book, according to the old-times scientific standards, is like a notebook.  
An abridged notebook; he even called it "The Abridged Collection".  
In his collection, Albukhari wanted to provide the most authentic reliable Hadiths.  
We will discuss about hime later Insha Allah.  
Albukhari was asked about his collection and how he mentioned 2600 Hadiths in it (except the the repeated ones)  
From how many narrations and Isnad did you get those Hadiths?  
Pay attention here. He replied: "I got them 600,000 Hadiths and narrations".  
How is that possible! Some people would ask: How did you reach that number?  
Referring back to the geometric progression;  
we would realize that it is possible to reach that number if we examine the triangle from the prophet to Albukhari after 200 years.  
Some would ask: Why would Albukhari search and write 600,000 narrations of only 2000 Hadiths?  
Hadith critics would help us in answering this question.  
Imam Yahya Bin Maeen, one of Albukhari's scholars [Sheikh], was one of the most popular and prominent scholars of Hadith at that time.  
the Imam said: "Unless I write a Hadith in 20 pages [50 in other narrations], It would not be clear to me".  
He said that the saying is only one by the Prophet (PBUH), but I had to examine all the narrations. Why is that?  
It is important to do that to employ Hadith criticism effectively, and to ensure that I could detect the smallest possible subtle issues.  
So he would examine 1 Hadith from one branch [narrator], then he would find plenty of other branches that require examination.  
Yes! as I told you before.  
For example, the Hadith “Actions are to be judged only by intentions";  
it is only one Hadith by Umar bin al-Khattab who reported it from the Prophet (PBUH).  
That same Hadith would be later narrated in 120-130 narrations on the authority of Umar bin al-Khattab.  
Plenty of different branches of the same Hadith.  
By the way, that Hadith “Actions are to be judged only by intentions" was mentioned in the Abridged collection of Albukhari in 7 different narrations;  
although his book was an abridged collection.  
Some scholars of Hadith stated that they found 200 branches of that same Hadith.  
That is only 1 example.  
Albukhari would write down all the hundreds of thousands of Hadiths in order to pass them to the criticism filter to give solid strong judgments.  
A judgment on the authenticity of Hadith [Sahih]?  
Yes! That the Hadith is Sahih.  
A lay person would not know all of that  
When we read a Hadith, we would mistakenly think that it is narrated in one line, starting from the Prophet to the last narrator.  
That's why the scholars and people of Sunnah would not doubt the authenticity of Sahih Hadiths as they are indisputable;  
we could trace one Hadith from up to 100 sources. That would validate the authenticity of the Prophet's Hadith.  
A good thing about Hadiths is that they could be traced.  
For example, Sahih Albukhari's book is a huge collection of thousands of Hadiths of the Messenger (PBUH).  
If I want to validate the narration of each Hadith mentioned in Albukhari's book, and whether they are narrated in other books, could I do that?   
I could easily do that, although the amount of books, narrations and information we've got today is not the same as in the time of Albukhari (1000 years ago)  
One of the prominent features of Hadith Science is that we could examine the validity of information.  
When Albukhari composed his book, the people, scholars, and Hadith critics back then did not accept his book immediately just because they knew him.  
They already had the Hadiths mentioned in Albukhari's book.  
Yet, they, once more, practised different forms of validation of the Hadiths mentioned in his book.  
They re-examined the Hadiths using their own Hadith criticizm tools.  
Well, I am talking about hundreds of thousands of narrations.  
The students of Yahya Bin Maeen, who would write 50 pages for one Hadith, reported that their Imam had written by his hand a million Hadiths.  
1 million!  
From such a huge number of narrations, Hadith critics provided us their filtered concluded hadiths which are now in the Sunnah books.   
When you said 1 million Hadith, did you mean 1 million different texts of the Prophet (PPBUH)?   
No! We said that before. We mean by the high numbers various branches [ways] of Hadith.  
The Hadith “Actions are to be judged only by intentions" ...  
Tell me more about Sanad [chain of transmission], it is difficult for anyone to understand it if they don't look at it.  
Well, I would give you an example of Sanad for the Hadith “Actions are to be judged only by intentions".  
Let me tell you how is the way for Albukhari to narrate that Hadith?  
He wouldn't narrate that Hadith as: "The Prophet said"; because the people would say you were born almost 200 years after the Prophet!  
Surely you did not hear that Hadith from the Prophet yourself! Then how did you get that Hadith?  
Therefore, Albukhari would state that his Sand and reference in that Hadith goes to the one before him.  
He would say: "My Sheikh Abdallah ibn Al-Zubayr al-Humaydi (one of the most popular scholars in Mecca) told me that Hadith".  
By the way, we do have now the printed Hadith book by Al-Humaydi.  
Even Alhumaydi did not listen to that Hadith from the Prophet by himself.  
Thus, Alhumaydi would say, Sufyan Ibn Uyaynah, one of Mecca's most prominent Imams and scholars, reported to us.  
Did you [Sufyan Ibn Uyaynah] hear it from the Prophet (PBUH) yourself?  
No, Yahya bin Sa'id Alansari, one of Medina scholars, reported it to me.  
Did you [Yahya bin Sa'id Alansari] hear it from the Prophet (PBUH) yourself?   
No, Muhammad ibn Ibrahim Altaymi, one of Medina scholars and narrators, reported it to me.  
Did you [Muhammad Altaymi] hear it from the Prophet (PBUH) yourself?   
No, Alqamah ibn Waqqas Allaythi, one of Medina's chief Followers of the Companions, reported it to me.  
Did you [Alqamah] hear it from the Prophet (PBUH) yourself?   
No, I heard from Umar bin al khattab that he heard the Prophet (PBUH) saying:   
“Actions are to be judged only by intentions and a man will have only what he intended.... [the rest of the Hadith]  
So this is how Albukhari transmitted the Hadiths of the Prophet;  
He clarified the chain of authority of each Hadith just as he received from his scholars.  
He rceived Hadiths from a number of scholars.  
That's why we would find the Hadith "Actions are to be judged only by intentions.." mentioned in his book by different narrators [different branches] who transmitted the Hadith on the authority of Umar who heard the Prophet saying the Hadith.  
Yes, that's right. The Isnad that I mentioned earlier is true and it is for the first Hadith mentioned in Albukhari's book.  
So, this is how Albukhari transmitted the Hadith"  
Abdullah ibn Al-Zubayr al-Humaydi reported that on the authority of Sufyan Ibn Uyaynah on the authority of Yahya bin Sa'id Alansari   
on the authority of Muhammad ibn Ibrahim Altaymi on the authority of Alqamah ibn Waqqas Allaythi that he saw Umar Bin Alkhattab adressing the people saying that he heard the Prophet saying... [the rest of the Hadith].  
So, the criticism filter would address all those narrators..  
Yes, Albukhari would address them all, starting from his scolar [Sheikh], ending with the Prophet (PBUH).  
How would he address and filter them?  
He would address all the 5 conditions that I mentioned before;  
Each narrator should be honorable [trustworthy and righteous];  
they should be righteous.   
So, he would ask about them..  
I will discuss about that later on.  
Also, they should be of strong memory [Precision and accuracy of the narrators];  
Moreover, the transmission [Sanad] should be connected like a chain.  
Also, there should not be irregularities or inconsistencies among the different narrations.  
Finally, there should not be any hidden defects in the Hadith.  
He examined each Hadith based on all of those conditions.  
You migh ask how would Albukhari examine all of the narrators in a Hadith!   
It would be possible for him to ensure that his Sheikh, Abdullah ibn Al-Zubayr al-Humaydi, met those conditions.  
However, how would it be possible for Albukhari to examine the other narrotrs who passed away before his birth!  
Well, this is why we have now the science of narrators.  
This science forms the greatest encyclopedia of the history of men [narrators] in human history.  
Well, the word "men" here is only a general one;  
there were thousands of women who narrated Hadiths, yet most of the narrators were men.  
Well, most importantly, I am not saying that there aren't other sciences that compete ours; there aren't any similar sciences there.  
We've got huge encyclopedias on information about the narrators;  
the narrator's name, nickname, where they lived, their scholars, students, and any available information of them.  
Sometimes the available information could form a huge book, especially if the narrator was a Sheikh, Imam or a Companioin..etc.  
However, information of other narrators could be within a few lines.  
There are such information on tens of thousands of narrators, since the time of the Prophet (PBUH) and till this day.  
Therefore, when searching for the narrators, we can find information on tens of thousands of them.  
So, we could easily find information about each narrator in the Isnad [from different layer].  
Who is Alqamah ibn Waqqas?  
We can find information of him in the science of narrators; his name, ancestors, birth, death, his scholars, his students, even the personal information about him.  
Some personal information could include his occupation, nickname, his wife and children.  
It could even include his appearance, clothes, habits, house, journeys and his travels in search of knowledge.  
He acquired all of that attention just because he narrated the Hadith.  
Yes! through him, the chain is connected.  
So the muslims back then would gather all the information available of someone when they narrate a Hadith to others.  
I mean, why would they write about the narrator?  
So you're asking why would they gather information about that narrator? yes.  
I mean not all of the narrators were Imams.  
Yes not all of them; a lot of them were of the common people.  
That's why you could find in their discription that they were greengrocers or clothiers.  
So a lot of them were from the common people; they were not judges or Imams.  
Some of them narrated only 10 Hadiths while others narrated 10 thousands of them. They were not the same.  
So, you should expect that people would search and write about you, and even examine you if you narrate a Haddith by the Prophet (PBUH).  
This happened with the narrators; they could ask a narrator to provide his reference books so they could examine them.  
They might even investigate the narrator if they had doubts; e.g., when and where did you hear that from your Sheikh [scholar]?  
If the narrator would ask why, they would reply that your Sheikh had never left his town and you did the same; so how did you meet each other?!  
The narrator would then justify.   
Information on anyone who narrated any Hadith throughout history were collected so their narrations could be criticized methodologically  
So, I would find information on any narrator in the chain of transmission [Sanad].  
There are tens of books throughout centuries on information about narrators, which we refer to as science of narrators and science of accreditation and discreditation.  
There are some heavily studied books of Sunnah such as Kutub Al-Sitta (the six books), Muwatta Malik, Musnad Ahmad..etc.  
Some scholars did a great job with such books. e.g., they collected the names of all the narrators mentioned in Sahih Al Bukhari and arranged them alphabetically in one book.  
So they arranged the names?  
Yes!  
They compiled them all in huge encyclopedias.  
The collected information from different resources and compiled them in huge encyclopedias!  
the Documentation of Sunnah and its criticism is based on such huge encyclopedias.  
Although there are such encyclopedias, sometimes we can't find any information but the name of a narrator.  
The scholars in such cases would immediately stop and examine the case.  
How could be examine the 5 conditions we mentioned earlier if we know nothing about the narrator but his name!  
Therefore, the scholars would not validate the Hadith until they get evidence whether the narrator is honest or not.  
They would clarify that this narration includes an unknown narrator,  
and that the Isnad of that narration is weak because they could not validate all the narrators.  
They validated all the narrators but one. Therefore they did not validate the narration although they know the narrator's name and ancestors, but, they don't know about his honesty and the other conditions.  
The criticism filter is a logical methodology.  
The narrators applied all the available methodologies and tools that enable the validation of narrations.  
The narrators would examine every aspect of Hadith: Isnad, content and text .. etc.  
So, such a criticism filter is a huge work.  
This is how Hadiths are validated.  
How did Albukhari validate the narrators of Hadiths? He used 2 approaches.  
The 1st approach: He would search about what did people who lived with that narrator say about him?  
What did they say about him? Was he honest?  
Not only that, Albukhari would then pass that narrator's narration to the criticism filter.  
Even if the narrator was known for his honesty, Albukhari would compare his narrations to others and detect any differences.  
So, the critics would do the same for each narrator in every Isnad.  
Thus, Albukhari only stated that all the thousands of Hadiths in his book are Sahih after he made sure that he examined each narrator in every Isnad of every Hadith.  
All the 600.000 narrations.  
Well, he examined all those narrations and specified the validated Sahih ones. then he filtered them and compiled them in his book which we will discuss later on.  
What auxiliary sciences one should learn to master the science of Hadith?  
there is no priesthood in Islam and no man other than prophet Muhammed (PBUH) is more important than the other.  
True. I like your comment; we all can do it. However, we need to have the right tools to do so.   
For example, in a marathon one should be able to run 42 km in order to compete. But most people can’t run this long distance.  
Hence, if someone untrained was not allowed to enter and asked about the reason he was rejected;   
the organizers would respond that they are not preventing him from doing so;  
they just believe that the he is not able to do so.  
The organizers would tell him to qualify himself first and then come back to apply.  
This is the same with the science of Hadith and all other sciences.  
We don’t mind critiquing with knowledge but rather the foolish criticism that was conducted without comprehension.   
So, just imagine someone who doesn’t understand the accreditation, discreditation or Sanad and dares to go into details of critiquing Hadiths!  
This act is an underestimation of science, it’s not an underitimatioation of Albukhari or me.  
So, we don't mind your criticism; we just need you to have the tools that assist you to do so.  
Given that Al-Bukhari was somewhat near in time to Muhammed (PBUH), let’s take Al-Albani and Shahroor as examples instead. Why do you accept Al-Albani yet reject Tharoor?  
Picking Shahroo as an example is a nice choice.   
I’ve recorded an episode previously summarizing his disastrous thoughts on Islam.   
So why do we reject him? Because he doesn’t follow a scientific methodology.  
This is our criteria for judging, the scientific standards. We're not taking sides. What Shahroor did was nothing but ignorance.   
On the other hand, Al-albani followed the right scientific methods and thus we don’t have an issue with him.   
But that doesn’t mean he isn’t criticized, as the only one impeccable is prophet Muhammed (PBUH).   
To make things more clear, at Umm Al-Qura University, a student majoring in the holy book and Prophet Muhammad's (PBUH) traditions takes approximately 160 credit hours to graduate.   
But does graduating make him immediately an Islamic scholar? No, this is only the beginning of his journey.   
His education paved the way for him to enter this field and to study more.   
If he wants to continue academically, he needs to get his master’s and PhD.   
Still, all of that is a drop in the ocean of this science.  
This knowledge that we are talking about relates to each Muslim, it concerns his life and destiny.   
So why do you confine it to scientific methodology?  
As I mentioned previously, the criticism filter is very logical.  
Thus, there isn’t much you can add to that filter which was founded by the narrators.  
Also, the narrators practiced all the possible scientific means to validate the news.  
I am accountable for what I am saying; this topic is taught in our major in detail. I am just giving you a general idea.  
So, whenever someone dedicated themselves to learning this logical and scientific methodology, they will be able to advance.   
I have an introductory lecture on the study of the science of Hadith that I taught in college years back which is currently published on YouTube.  
It lasts a little over an hour and it summarizes the why we say that those five conditions are logically the ideal approach for criticism.  
You mean that this methodology is applied to all other sciences and is not limited to this knowledge of Sunnah?  
It is logical knowledge.   
The world is full of news whether it was political, medical, related to physics or chemics, astronomical and religious, etc.   
And for all those news, a criticism methodology is needed to validate them.  
Nonetheless, the methodology employed in the science of Hadith is thorough and superior to them all;  
there is nothing to add to it.  
For that, to whoever rejects it I challenge them with two questions:  
1) Point out the illogical part of our methodology,  
2) then show me your alternative one which you believe is right.   
Actually, most rejectors fail in both parts of the challenge.   
They also attribute to the narrators what they didn’t say, like their famous lie that the narrators overlook the text and care only about the Sanad.  
...  
The narrator doesn’t confirm the Sanad only, he considers the narrated texts as well, and their effect.   
He also checks what conflicts the texts might have with the Quran, the scientific facts, and other criteria.   
Thus, I am telling them to show the error and reveal the methodology they believe to be right.  
So far from what I’ve witnessed, whoever tried to win this challenge fails in that.  
The current criticism methodology is a scientific and logical approach that has been practiced since the first century.  
Those who doubt the science of Hadith and say how could Al-Bukhari have heard 6000 hadiths from the Prophet (PBUH) and memorized them; what is your respond to them?  
That is a simple question.  
Those people assume that Al-Bukhari was a companion, and that he memorized the 6000 Hadiths.  
Well, the truth is always bounded but there are no boundaries to mistakes.   
What you mentioned is one of the ridiculous mistakes.   
Whoever said that doesn’t even know whether Al-Bukhari was a companion or not but dares to debate over the topic.  
To all of those I always like to remind them about a logical rule and a canon of Islam: we are not allowed to talk without knowledge.   
17:36 (Do not follow what you have no ˹sure˺ knowledge of. Indeed, all will be called to account for ˹their˺ hearing, sight, and intellect.) Dr. Mustafa Khattab, the Clear Quran.   
This is a strict prohibition, and you will be responsible for that.  
In fact, both your knowledge and intellect should prevent you from doing so.   
The problem is that a lot of opposers and debaters argue about what they don’t have knowledge of.  
And that is a violation of Allah’s command and even the basics of science.  
You have the right to discuss and debate but gain knowledge before you do so.  
I don’t want to sound arrogant, but some of the debaters need to be taught for a whole semester to understand where they are wrong in the argument and how the Hadiths were narrated.  
You can now send them a link to this episode.  
I might do that, it would be nice.  
But really, some of the objections are so ridiculous and weak that you don’t know how to summarize the answer.   
And let me repeat, whoever objects against the science of Hadith, study it carefully from the perspective of the experts and only then you can debate.  
Sorry for interrupting you. Just recently someone was messaging me regarding sayings he have heard from an individual about the Prophet's Sunnah.   
He said, what he has heard was convincing and that he couldn’t find a response.   
Then he started talking with details where I stopped him and asked:  
Since you listened to all what this man has to offer, did you consider what other Muslims in the past 1400 years said with different perspective?  
This is a scientific integrity. You were supposed to do that and to study it with a scientific approach then choose between them.   
I asked him: Did you do so? He answered, no!   
Still, he said I believe that that man's words are convincing.   
I responded to him: "Well, that is because he was your only source."   
He replied to me: "No one gave me an answer when I researched".  
I then replied: "All the answers you are looking for are in the books. You should be fair when debating."  
Study the science of Hadith from the perspective of the experts and our scholars, only then you may argue. You can’t do that without minimum knowledge.  
The issue is that most opposers didn’t read Al-Bukhari's book and don’t even know who he is.  
Yet, they would dare to debate and record responses. They might even author books regardless of their ignorance in that subject.  
Respect science! I am not asking you to respect me or Al-Bukhari.  
Take the orientalists as an example, though they are non-Muslims, they were able to view the criticism methodology and respect it. They even appraise it for the extensive efforts put into it.   
So, respect the science and give it what it deserves then come and debate.  
If Muhammad Shahroor were to come to you before he died and asked you, what auxiliary sciences we need to study to be qualified?  
Well, Muhammad Shahroor didn’t talk about Sunnah alone.  
He was an explainer with diverse topics.  
Shahroor talked about everything. He even said that it is not mandatory to believe in Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) nor the Quran!   
He also said that a human can be a Muslim by only believing in Allah alone and in the afterlife.   
Well, that means a person can be a Muslim even if he followed Hinduism, discarding the Quran and the prophet's Sunnah and still be awarded the paradise.   
Those who think that the dispute with Shahroor was just his opinions on the validity of Sunnah actually looked at a small fragment of his thoughts.   
I don’t prefer to talk about a certain individual as Shahroor is only one amongst many others like him.  
I just mentioned him as an example.  
It was a good example indeed.   
Shahroor didn’t even know how to verbally recite the Quran verses before explaining them. He failed miserably in this.  
I'm not even talking about his linguistic skills in Arabic and his knowledge in the Prophet's Sunnah and the related sciences, the Islamic jurisprudence and the interpretation of the Quran.   
Only if he could master the recitation of Quran, we could’ve move forward with that.  
There are a lot like him, being unqualified methodologically.  
Our methodology is available in our books and is not some sort of top-secret material that we hide from others.   
You just need to learn it, learn the sciences that would qualify you. If you do so, welcome on board.  
Could you quickly list what you refer to as auxiliary sciences?  
Sure. Hadith sciences can be divided into two parts: Transmitting the prophetic Sunnah and knowing the prophetic Sunnah.  
Transmitting the prophetic Sunnah is concerned with the narrated Hadith as texts and what relates to them from comprehension, explanation, and narration.  
Knowing the prophetic Sunnah, on the other hand, concerns the rules of accepting Hadiths or rejecting them and dealing with Sanad and narrators.   
This was only to summarize as you need other sciences to complement your knowledge in the science of Hadith to be a real scholar.   
E.g., you need to detect whether the narrated hadith conflicts with one of the absolute topics in the religion;   
such as conflicting with the consensus of Muslim legal scholars on a legal question or conflicting with the Quran in an absolute explanation of a specific verse.  
This means you need to understand the Quran and other things, but these two sciences are where you should start without a doubt.  
We intended to talk about Al-Bukhari later; However, the name of Al-Bukhari, may God have mercy on him, is inseparably linked with the Sunnah of the Prophet.  
We would like to talk about Al-Bukhari as a person. What is his story? Who is he? How did he live? Tell me about him.  
Who is Al-Bukhari?  
Many books have been written in "Who Is Al-Bukhari?"  
But I will try to brief you and the listener on who Al-Bukhari is.  
Imam Abu Abdullah, Muhammad ibn Ismail ibn Ibrahim Al-Bukhari, attributed to Bukhara, a region in Asia nowadays located in Uzbekistan.  
He was born in 194 AH, and he is not of Arabic origin.  
He grew up in a science-loving family.  
His father died when he was young, and his mother raised him.  
He learned the Qur'an and memorized it at a very young age.  
After that, he learned the Sunnah of the Prophet before attaining the age of 10.   
An important note is that when we talk about him, we should be aware that he was not ordinary, he was a genius.  
Well, I am not just claiming that, it is a proven fact.  
So, we should be careful when discussing about him as he was not ordinary.  
Interestingly, Albukhari talked about himself when he began to take an interest in the Prophet's Hadiths in Al-Kuttab stage [the first teaching stage].  
He said before the age of 10, he started learning and memorizing Hadiths.  
After the age of ten, he started looking for the Sheikhs of his country to learn from them.  
During his studies, he was sitting with one of the Sheikhs of the country.  
Pay attention to his interesting story. Albukhari was sitting with the Sheikh discussing Hadiths. The Sheikh read the hadiths that he narrated of the Prophet (PBUH), including their Isnad.  
While the Sheikh was reading the Hadiths he had memorized, the students, including the 11 years-old Al-Bukhari, wrote them down.  
The Sheikh narrated one of the Hadiths as: "on the authority of Abu Al-Zubair, about Ibrahim", and completed its Isnad.  
The eleven-year-old boy stood up and said to the Sheik that Abu Al-Zubair had never narrated about Ibrahim.   
The Sheik rebuked Al-Bukhari, so Al-Bukhari asked him to refer to the original book to make sure.   
When he looked at it and asked Al-Bukhari about the correct Isnad (he wanted to know whether it was by chance or if he knew it),  
He said to him that Al-Zubair narrated about 'Adi, about Ibrahim.  
The Sheikh made a mistake, as there was a famous narrator named Abu Al-Zubair, and another named Al-Zubair. The Sheikh made a mistake and confused the two names.  
He said to Al-Bukhari that what he said was right!   
Then the Sheikh corrected the mistake, and his students did so based on the comment of that little boy.  
Pay attention with me here. I am not talking about his memorization skills, yet his critiquing skills.   
Look how he knew that Abu Al-Zubair couldn't narrate about Ibrahim, and that the correct Isnad is that Al-Zubair narrated about Adi, about Ibrahim.  
That young child at the age of 11 acquired such a critiquing skill.  
A genius child who had scientific and critiquing skills.  
On top of that, he gained his knowledge from the greatest scholars of his time.   
How would he be as an adult? He bacame then Imam Bukhari.   
Shortly after reaching puberty, Imam Bukhari left with his mother and brother Ahmed from their country, Bukhara, and went to Makkah for Hajj.  
On the way, whenever he had passed through a country and found Sheikhs, he would sit with them and write the Hadiths they narrated.  
After he safely performed Hajj, his mother and brother returned to their country, but he decided to complete the journey of seeking knowledge.  
He stayed in Mecca and Medina, then he moved to Egypt.  
After that, he went to different places: Palestine, several cities in the Levant, Iraq which was the capital of the world at that time.  
He travelled across different countries. He narrated on the authority of over a thousand Sheikhs (these aren't my words; he talked about himself).   
He said that he has narrated on the authority of more than a thousand sheikhs from different countries, in a long academic journey that took him so many years.  
In his journey, whenever he passed through a country and found someone narrating hadiths, whether they were lots or few, he used to write them down and collect them.  
By following this method and over the years, he collected hundreds of thousands of narrations of the Prophet (PBUH) as well as his companions and followers.   
Not only did he learn the Prophet's Sunnah, but he also learned interpretation from interpretation scholars and wrote the companions' and followers' interpretations.   
He learned from linguists, wrote and learned their books, and transmitted them.  
He also learned Fiqh from different scholars, and he copied their books.  
He wrote the Fatwas of the companions and the followers, and the Fatwas of the different Islamic jurists.  
So his knowledge-seeking journey included hundreds of places over long years. He met more than a thousand Sheikhs.   
Such a journey contributed to his great personality; he was a genius who had the tools that assisted him in serving this field heavily. He exerted great efforts for that cause.  
Years passed, and he had nothing to do but this until he completed his journey and collected rich knowledge.  
During his long journey, he started working on his huge academic projects.   
He said that he started collecting one of his most important books (I don't mean Sahih Al-Bukhari; we will talk about it later), which is a book on the science of the narrators.  
That book is entitled "The Great History" which is printed today in more than ten volumes. It addresses thousands of narrators.  
It included the narrators' biographies, a brief on each of them, their name and ancestry, their most important Sheikhs and students, some of their narrations with a few comments.  
He said that he started composing that book early since he was in Hejaz, precisely in Al-Madinah where the Prophet (PBUH) was buried.   
He completed this book and others (incliding "Sahih Al-Bukhari" which he was known for).  
He composed Sahih Albukhari during that journey as well. The reason for composing it is interesting;  
He was once one of the attendees of Imam Ishaq ibn Rahawayh's lesson, one of his senior Sheikhs and Imams of Khorasan (today it is located between Afghanistan and Iran).  
Al-Bukhari said: "We were with Ishaq Ibn Rahawayh who said, "If only you would compile a book of only authentic narrations of the Prophet."  
He said: "This suggestion remained in my heart, so I began compiling the Sahih". None of the books back then provided a collection of the authentic and strong hadiths.  
That request inspired him to work on it as a scientific project that took many years.   
He spent 16 years on compiling "Sahih Al-Bukhari".   
The limited number of hadiths he brought out in his book resulted from a complicated work extracted from six hundred thousand narrations.   
Such a complicated process resulted in his book "Sahih Al-Bukhari" (which we may talk about later) as well as his book "The Great History".  
Despite the enormity of this book (The Great History), which he composed, it is very brief.  
Imam al-Bukhari said: "If you give me any name in Islamic history, I would mostly give you a story about them, however, I summerized this book as no one would be able to write if it were longer.  
This book is brief, yet it came out in huge volumes.  
He said: "If he would include all that he had, people would not be able to benefit from it."  
He did the same with his book "Sahih Al-Bukhari", which I will discuss in detail later.  
When people had acess to his books, people ere amazed by them.   
They already had known how knowledgeable he was, they noticed that during his journey through his meetings, discussions, and notes.  
It is interesting that Imam Albukhari, from a young age, was a genius who drew the attention of everyone, including his sheikhs.  
Therefore, you shouldn't be surprised to find tremendous praise for him, not only by his students but also his Sheikhs.  
There is a memorable quote by Ahmed bin Hanbal (founder of the Hanbali school of Sunni jurisprudence and one of Albukhari's noted Sheikhs).   
Ahmed's son (Abdullah) reported that his father said: "Khorasan has not produced anyone like Muhammad bin Ismail.”  
You should realized that it was said by Albukhari's noted Sheikh Ahmed bin Hanbal.  
When his son asked him: “O father, among your students, who are the top scholars that you classify as memorizers of hadiths, having the highest levels of knowledge and criticism?"  
His father replied: "they are 4" then he named Muhammad ibn Isma'il AlBukhari.  
One of Albukhari's senior Sheikhs (Muhammad bin Bashar Bindar) said frankly: "the Hadith scholars of the world are 4". The first one he named was Muhammad bin Ismail Albukhari.  
Likewise, Do you know what did Ishaq bin Rahawayh do (whom we talked about previously) when he received Al-Bukhari's book “The Great History” and realized the great effort put into it?  
He went to the prince of the country (who was one of those interested in science) and said: “O prince, shall I not show you magic? Take a look at this book”.   
The prince took a look at the book. He was amazed and said: “I do not understand how this book was written. It is amazing!”  
Ibin Rahawayh told him: “Muhammad bin Ismail authored this”.  
Those are the words of his Sheikhs.  
There was a remarkable saying by Imam Ali bin Al-Madini (may God have mercy on him) one of Albukhari's senior Sheikhs and a noted Imam of Islam in the field of hadith and its anatomy.  
it was reported to Ali one day by some of the students who gossiped [conveyed some words to their Sheikh] that one of them heard Imam Albukhari saying, “I never underestimate myself with anyone except Ali bin Al-Madini”.  
Do you know how he responded? He said, “Let it be said, he (Al-Bukhari) never encountered someone like himself”.  
I'm just giving you a few quotes of his Sheikhs, knowing that many of them died before reading read his books or even part of them.  
They said such words based on the lessons and discussions they had with him.  
When Imam Al-Bukhari published his books, the world showed interest in his knowledge.  
He even sat once to teach in Baghdad, and he had his books and the people were reading to him.  
One of the attendees said: “He had three people to repeat what he said, each was at a distance to transmit his speech to those after them [before the invention of microphones and speakers]. The attendees in that gathering were 20,000.”.  
During his last days, he left Iraq for Nishapur (in Iran today), and the people of Nishapur heard that he would come.  
One of the great scholars of Hadith in Nishapur, Abu Hatim al-Razi, said to them:  
“A man from the people of Khurasan will come to you. Among all of those who travelled from Kharasan to Iraq, there isn't anyone better than him in memorizing Hadith and having rich knowledge of it.”  
When the people knew about that, they went out to meet him miles away from their town. Their town was left with no one!  
They left their town just to welcome him and meet him.  
Albukhari with his rich knowledge lived with different people and travelled. His reputation was unrivalled  
During his academic journey, he did not only produce books but also taught a lot of noted scholars.  
So, many genius scholars were actually his students.  
For example, Imam Muslim (who wrote "Sahih Muslim") was one of his students.  
Also, Imam Al-Tirmidhi (the author of "Al-Sunan") was one of his top students who studied with him him for a very long time. He said in his book that he benefited the most from Imam Al-Bukhari.  
Imam Al-Nasa’i as well (the author of "Al-Sunan") was one of his brilliant students, that's besides hundreds of others.  
Al-Bukhari narrated his books, and people learned from him.   
One of his top students, Muhammad bin Yusuf Al-Firabri, narrated the book Sahih Al-Bukhari.  
Al-Firabri was a young man in his early twenties when he met Al-Bukhari during his last days.  
He learned from him and stayed with him for several years. He heard Sahih al-Bukhari from him several times and mastered it.   
After that, Imam Al-Bukhari died, and thousands of his students remained, including Al-Firabri. He lived until he almost attained the age of 100.  
Shortly before he died in the year 320 AH, he told his students:  
“Ninety thousand people, including me, had heard the Sahih from Muhammad Ibn Ismail. Today, none of them is alive except me.”  
Ninety thousand were there to hear The Sahih! That was normal back then, considering the rich knowledge at that time.  
Imam Al-Bukhari, may Allah have mercy on him, died in the year 256 AH in a small village in Uzbekistan and was buried there.  
Today, the location of his grave is known by the people.  
That's a brief on Imam Albukhari, his life, and how he lived.  
Well. I am impressed, you answered most of the questions I have previously prepared.  
Well, you talked about Albukhari and how genious he was. I am sure that now in the comments under, pepole will reject that and say that it is an exaggeration.  
It is strange how people immediatly believe the story of the poets who memorize a poem by hearing it once.  
They believe the story of Mozart who memorized a piece of music played once by someone in the castle when he was 5 years old. He then replayed it and made it even better.  
Some people would believe such stories; but those same people would consider stories as Albukhari's to be an exaggeration!  
So why would they be convinced that Mozart was a genius when he was 5; but don't believe that Albukhari was a genius when he was 11?  
I believe they don't object because they think no one can be genius at this age; the objection is concerning Albukhari himself, they don't believe he was!  
To this date, there are some geniuses who live among us.  
Actually, geniuses are rare.  
I don't think that there is someone who doesn't believe in the existence of human geniuses.  
Nevertheless, some may object the information provided by Albukhari, and they may reject Albukhari himself.  
The answer to your question is as the following:  
It would be easy to provide evidence that what we are saying about Albukhari is not an exaggeration as long as you do believe in the existence of geniuses.  
Our evidence is not based only on the information on Albukhari collected by the generations before us.  
We believe Albukhari for 2 reasons.  
1st, the scientific works by Albukhari are convincing.  
2nd, the facts today make us believe him.  
We can test and validate the work by Albukhari.  
As I said before, You can check the books by Albukhari and validate its content.  
Although what we have today of works are not as much as before, yet we can know more about him from his works.  
For example, he called his Sahih book "the Abridged Collection"! Sahih Albukhari is not the only work of him.  
So, look at the huge number of scientific works of Albukhari!  
Look at his works with his students!  
Look at how he scientifically influenced the ones after him!  
Look at how he influenced those who were around him!  
You would realize that we are not exaggerating.  
Let me give you another example.  
Aren't there people today who would memorize plenty of texts? Yes there are.  
I will not give you examples only in the context of Hadith.  
In the past, in Saudi Arabia, vehicle registration plates used only numbers.  
Then, numbers and letters were used later.  
I remember that.  
Some of our relatives and friends used to memorize the plates' numbers, letters, car color and brand, car owner and where they live in the different cities.  
They would know that someone not from our city had visited us and know where they came from and who they were only from their car!  
I witnessed that!  
Such people are not geniuses, they are normal.  
What about geniuses who dedicated their life for a cause!  
Today, there are hundreds of people who memorize thousands of Hadiths and whole books; memorizing them as good as you memorize Al Fatihah.  
Some of them memorize Hadiths with or without the Isnad.  
You can see that on the YouTube, their Shiekh would test them by asking them about any Hadith's Isnad or content and they would answer correctly.  
You should bear in mind that the time now is different than before. Before, they used to depend mainly on their memory  
So, we are not talking about normal people like those who would memorize Hadiths. We are talking about geniuses.  
Geniuses are not only in the field of Sharia!  
Dr. Alathami told us a story about one of the millioniers in the western world (America) who would read share market numbers.  
By reading those numbers once, which are in hundreds and may include fractions, he would memorize them.  
So, geniuses are there. It is strange that we don't believe that there were genius scholars who dedicated their life for Sharia.  
I am telling you that such genius scholars back then were dedicated ever since they were kids to learn, write, search and memorize.   
Throughout tens of years!  
Yes, throughout tens of years.  
Well, one of my friends owns a tourism and travel company. He is causing us troubles.  
We would usually arrange our trips and travels through him.  
I don't think he is troubling you as long as he offers good prices.  
Well that is not the trouble.  
He memorized our ID numbers. The ID of all his clients!  
How many clients?  
So many clients. Only us, his friends, know that he would memorize all the IDs.  
Tens or hundreds of clients?  
He would memorize his clients' visa numbers.  
Of each client?  
Yes!  
He would memorize his clients' mobile numbers.  
I am telling you this as his friend.  
You tested his memory yourself?  
Yes, he would talk to you about that. Well it is easy for him to memorize registrations plates as well.  
He memorized my mobile number. If you ask him about one of our friend's number, he would spell it to you.  
If you ask him about my Visa number, he would spell it!  
If you ask him about the passport number of a client, he would spell it to you!  
Well, if you ask him about where did the client travel or live, it would be surely easy for him.  
He would give you every small detail of his clients trips in any year.  
He got his own team of workers.  
So, the story of my friend made me believe in the existence of such people.  
He is not deliberately trying to remember things. for him, once his eyes read a number, he will memorize it.  
Nice story, thank you for sharing it. Greetings to your friend.  
Your story remind us of some stories told to us by some narrators about the geniuses in their time and how they memorized Hadiths.  
Some narrators would say that they would never forget anything they wrote.  
more interestingly, some of them would go to the market, placing their fingers on their ears to avoid memorizing the words of the people in the market.  
They don't want to occupy their mind with unnecessary things.  
So geniuses are there.  
We can see the output of such geniuses.  
Yes! and as I told you before, it is convincing if we look at the examples of geniuses around us and consider the scientific output of such geniuses.  
Well, I had so many questions, but you covered them all.  
I would like to hear from you regarding the issue of Albukhari, being non-Arab.  
Would that affect his narration of Hadith?  
Before answering that question, I would like to ask whether it is preferable for a one to be bilingual or not?  
Is it preferable to be bilingual or even multilingual?  
It's preferable to be multilingual especially when you master the language.  
It means that you've got high mental abilities; especially if the languages are from different language families (not partly similar)  
Eventually, it's a point of strength for Albukhari; mastering Arabic language and writing in it. It means that he was a genius.  
Would it be impossible for non-Arabs to master Arabic language?  
Scientifically, it is possible.  
Some people when they learn Arabic and master it,even if they were non-Arabs, they would succeed in that language and possibly be one of its prominent speakers.  
One of the best examples is Sibawayh.  
Sibawayh is the most prominent Arabic language scholar ever.  
He was of Persian origin but he travelled to the Arab world and learned Arabic from them.  
He learned the language from the best scholars back then. Eventually, he became the best Arabic grammerian.  
Not only Sibawayh; there are many non-Arab Arabic scholars who excelled in the language;  
e.g., Abu Ali Al-Farisi, Ibn Jinni and others. All of them mastered more than 1 language. They were the best scholars in Arabic.  
So, being non-Arab would not prevent you from mastering Arabic.  
A number of scholars back then were non-Arab and that did not prevent them from mastering the language;  
e.g., the Copts in Egypt who are non-Arabs,  
The Berbers in the western part of the Arab world,  
the people of Persian, Indian or Bukharan origins in the eastern world.  
Thus, the Arabic language had never hindered muslim Scholars from emerging.  
The evidence of that is their scientific works that were written and produced in Arabic; the language did not prevent them.  
Regardless of all that, lets look at Albukhari's works that we have in our hands.  
Would you be able to specify 1 mistake in his Arabic writings?  
Interestingly, Ibn Hisham one of the prominent Arabic scholars in the 8th century (AH) studied Sahih Albukhari's book with his students linguistically only.  
Arabic scholars have never pointed any linguistic contradictions or mistakes in the works of Albukhari.  
Then, where is the problem?  
Albukhari excelled in the Arabic language, his works prove that. He heavily studied Arabic language.  
He were taught the language by its expert. He would mention them in his works, such as An-Nadr bin Shumail, Ma'mar ibn al-Muthanna (Abu ubaidah)  
So, he perfected the language and wrote in it. He even wrote some poems in Arabic. His works are available today.  
 The language would only be a barrier for him, being a non-Arab, if we could specify some linguistic mistakes and contradictions that would affect the soundness of his works.  
Nevertheless, the scholars did not refer to such mistakes in his works.  
A good thing is that Albukhari earned his reputation for his knowledge only.  
The Arabs back then did not care about his name, origin, or even his social class.  
They only cared for his knowledge.  
Was this way of dealing with others common among people in the Islamic history.  
There is a Hadith of the Prophet (PBUH). The situation when the Hadith was transmitted is interesting.   
During the Caliphate of Umar ibn al-Khattab, he used to assign governers to different regions.  
He assigned one of the Companions as a governer of Mecca.  
One day, Umar headed to the direction of Mecca.  
His governer in Mecca headed to meet Umar near Medinah.  
Umar met the governor of Mecca. He asked him: “Whom have you appointed to govern Mecca on behalf of you?”  
"Who is governing the people of Mecca on behalf of you?"  
He said: “Ibn Abza.” He said: “Who is Ibn Abza?” He said: “He is one of our freed slaves.”  
He remarked: “So you have appointed a freed slave over them.” He said: “He is a good reciter of the Book of Allah and knowledgeable about the laws of inheritance.”  
Umar ibn al-Khattab paused, then he said that the Prophet (PBUH) said: “Indeed, Allah elevates some people with this Book and degrades others.”  
That would never be possible in the pre-Islamic period. Slaves would not be assigned to anything.  
Allah elevated him because of his knowledge of Quran and Sunnah.  
Such incidents occurred a lot in Islam.  
A lot of companions were close to the Prophet (PBUH) although they were non-Arab, e.g., Salman Alfarisi, Bilal Alhabashi.  
The people since then continued in their way of dealing with others.  
They ranked the people based on their knowledge and not their names.  
Your name would not upgrade you to the level of knowledgeable people if you are not.  
That is true. There were so many prominent people in the Islamic history who were not Arabs.  
Of course there were Arab scholars; I am just saying that the prominent ones were not only Arabs.  
What mattered was how eligible and knowledge someone was and how they would share their knowledge with others.  
A good example of such non-Arab knowledgeable people is Imam Albukhari.  
In America, they call people to be color blind, they should not judge people based on their color (don't be racist).  
I believe that muslims were color blind a long time ago.  
The Prophet (PBUH) said in his farewell sermon: "There is no preference between Arab and Ajam, Ajam and Arab, except for piet (Taqwa)"  
There are a number of Sahih Hadiths in Albukhari's book that are contradictory. I want to hear your opinion regarding this.  
To understand such issues, we need to have a good understanding of the scientific methodology adopted by Hadith scholars.  
let me tell you something in general which is not specific for Albukhari.  
When a narrator is narrating a Hadith, they are only transmitting the Hadiths which their narrations are validated.  
So, Ablukhari would write in his book that he validated the Hadiths narrations and included them in his book.  
He would stop at this point.  
It's not the responsibility of the narrator to clarify the content of Hadith and infer its meaning.  
It's the responsibility of the Islamic Jurisprudent (Faqih).  
Do you mean that a narrator is not to judge the content of Hadith?  
Let me paraphrase that in a nicer way.  
I will give you an example of a conversation between Imam Abu Hanifah and Alamash.  
Abu Hanifa is one of the most important Islamic scholars; the founder of the Sunni Hanafi school of Fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence).  
Alamash is one of the popular narrators of Hadith.  
Alamash and Abu Hanifa were discussing some legal issues.   
Abu Hanifa answered the questions asked by referring to Hadiths. Alamash was amazed how he inferred that from Hadiths.  
Then, Alamash said: “O scholars of Fiqh, you are the doctors and we are the pharmacists.” He meant by "we" the narrators.  
Doctors are the ones who know about diseases and the medicinces required. After their diagnosis, they would prescribe the medicines offered by the pharmacist.  
Pharmacists, on the other hand, would offer you the medicines; but they can't prescribe the best medicine for each patient based on their sickness. That's the job of doctors.  
Similarly, narraotrs only validate the narration of Hadiths.  
Actually, the scholars of Hadith are aware of this point; we should do the same.  
When Albukhari compiled his book of Hadiths, he only attempted to address the narration and transmission of Hadith; although he was a prominent Faqih.  
You would only find in his book the validated Hadiths;   
although he would, for some Hadiths, list his notes and comments.  
However, Albukhari did not attempt to discuss in his book the issues of Fiqh nor did he infer them from the Hadiths.  
Doctors, Islam Jurisprudents, are the one responsible for inferring and discussing the matters of Fiqh.  
Generally, and I'm not confining that to your question, we should not reject the Hadiths narrated by Albukhari by saying:   
"How do you want us to abide to those rules in the Hadiths.. Why does Albukhari want us to do such and such"  
Actually, Albukhari does not want us to do such and such; he was only transmitting validated narrated Hadiths.  
It's the job of Faqih to infer laws from Hadiths.  
Considering that essential point, lets explore why would narrators include different narrations in their books as what Albukhari did.  
They do that for different purposes.  
They seek to provide you the different narrations of 1 subject.  
For example, Albukhari would narrate a Hadith saying that the Prophet (PBUH) passed away when he was 60 years old.  
He would also narrate another Hadith by another Companion saying that the Prophet passed away when he was 63.  
He would only provide you the various Hadiths in 1 subject.  
Concerning when exactly he passed away and what could we infer from the Hadith, we should refer to the specialized in that subject.  
You should refer in that matter to the Prophetic biography scholars who might tell you that Arabs during the old times tend to round numbers, while others give the exact number.  
Such a matter is not the responsibility of Albukhari.  
Albukhari only transmitted the Sahih Hadiths in that subject, while jurisprudents and scholars would use such Hadiths to infer Sharia matters.  
He would sometimes deliver contradictory Hadiths provided that such contradictions do not affect the content of Hadiths.  
A good example for that is the Hadith of Jaber's camel;  
The story of that Hadith is very popular, but I don't want to go into its details, taking so much of your time. You can google it.  
Briefly, the story says that the Prophet bought from Jaber his camel.  
For how much did he buy it? Some narrations say that he bought it for 1 Dinar,  
other narrations say that he bought it for less or higher than 1 Dinar.  
However, all the narrations of that Hadith agreed on the est of the content; the only disagreement was regarding the price.  
Albukhari, nevertheless, included all the narrations of that Hadith, as the disagreement regarding the price won't affect the Hadith's Islamic jurisprudence.  
It won't matter whether it's 1 or 2 Dinars.  
What mattered is the inference of Sharia laws; the purpose he mentioned in his book.  
So, such contradictions won't affect the Hadith, that's why Albukhari included them.  
Other narrators would do the same; transmitting all the different narrations of 1 subject so jurisprudents could provide their inference.  
E.g., a narrator would narrate a Hadith that the Prophet (PBUH) forbade drinking while standing up.  
That is a Shaih Hadith.  
Another narration, regarding the same subject, says that the Prophet (PBUH) went to Mecca for his farewell Hajj, he drank Zamzam water while standing up.  
Surely Albukhari noticed the contradiction between the 2 narrations, yet he kept them both for the jurisprudents.  
Eventually, the jurisprudents would collect all the Hadiths relating to 1 subject, examine them, inferr the intended matters, and finally provide the inferred Sharia laws.  
The jurists did the same for the "drinking while standing" Hadith, they inferred that the prohibition in that Hadith was out of advice; it's preferable to do so.  
They also inferred such prohibition does not indicate that it's Haram to do so, as the Prophet did drink while standing to show that it is not.  
Albukhari knew that; he included both Hadiths for the scholars to infer such matters.  
Sometimes, other narrators would provide both contradictory narrations to indicate that the Sahih Hadith comes in another contradictory narration which is defective.  
Such situations are rare, but they did occur.  
The narrator by doing so wanted to indicate that they are aware of the other defective Hadith that contradicts with the Sahih Hadith.  
It happened with some narrators.  
However, it is our job, Hadith scholars, to examine the Sahih and defective Hadiths and specify them  
The main point here is that we should realize that Albukhari was aware of the contradictions between some Hadiths.  
Some narrated Hadiths in Albukhari's book contradict with today's concepts,  
e.g., women's freedom, slaves and their freedom .. etc.  
Other Hadiths may contradict with today's sciences; how could we explain that matter?  
A very important and nice question.  
I would like first to give an introduction before its answer.  
facing some issues in Albukhari's work or in Hadiths should not make them defective.   
It is ok to ask questions that answer the issues you face in such matters.  
However, we should look for its answer in the right way.  
How should we deal with any Shariah issues or questions whether in Albukhari or others works.  
If you are a specialized expert in that field, then you should use the right methodology and tools to look for the answer.  
However, if you are not, which is the case with most of people, then you should refer to the expert ones to answer your questions.  
It is not only a methodology of Sharia, it's a scientific logical one; to refer to the expert ones to answer your questions, it's a common sense.  
Such methodology was already mentioned in the Quran and Sunnah.  
Therefore, once we face an issue, we should consult the experts in the field to reach the answer we seek.  
How should we deal with Hadiths that contradict with some aspects,  
contradicting for example with the Quran, the infallibility of the Prophet, women's rights, or even modern science.  
There is an issue when someone says that there is a Hadith contradicting with the Quran,  
the issue is that the Hadith does not contradict with the Quran, yet with the way they interpret the Quran (their understanding of it).  
Recently, a number of people who reject Sunnah have contacted me,  
They tell me strange things, to the extent that they sometimes call me a polytheist for believing in Sunnah,  
they would say that the Hadith contradicts with the Quran, yet it contradicts with their understanding of it.  
Actually, all of the Sahih Hadiths that they claimed to be contradictory with Quran are contradictory with their understanding of it, not with the Quran itself.  
Therefore, you who have such a claim, should first consider my understanding of the Quran and how the Hadiths do not contradict with it.  
I am not telling you to adopt my way of thinking, I am just saying it's unfair to call me a polytheist based on your understanding of Quran.  
Your understanding of Quran contradicts with my understanding of it, not with the Quran itself.  
My understanding of Quran and Hadith is different than yours, you should not force me to adopt yours.  
Even you, you should not force the other side to adopt your understanding.  
Well, if I provide strong evidences that support my understanding, then I could convince the other side.  
So, it is not about the understanding of someone...  
It is not about people, it's about the scientific methodology;  
Any understanding that contradicts the Sunnah of the Prophet (PBUH) is a wrong understanding.  
That's the main point here.  
Furthermore, one of the most important reasons why we need Sunnah is that it helps us in understanding Quran the right way.  
Otherwise, if we are to let everyone understand Quran based on their own without having Sunnah, the standard and tool, then we would have contradictory understandings of Quran.  
Actually, this is happening today.  
Some people infer from Quran based on their own understanding that Prophet Mohammed was not a prophet!  
Others infer that the 5 prayers we pray everyday are not obligatory!  
Others as well infer and claim that we are not allowed to spread Islam among non-Arabs.  
They infer all such claims from Quran!  
Others as well infer from Quran that the forbidden things, that are agreed upon by most muslims, generation by generation, are not forbidden; e.g., adultery, usury (Riba), or alcohol drinking!  
They would say that this is their understanding of Quran.  
Does Quran order us to follow Sunnah?  
Of course!  
How?  
There are many verses that refer us to the Prophet (PBUH).  
There are the verses which command us to follow the Prophet "If you should love Allah, then follow me, [so] Allah will love you" 31 Alomran,  
There are verses in which there is an order to follow the Prophet as an example "here has certainly been for you in the Messenger of Allah an excellent pattern" 21 Alahzab.  
There are verses that command us to be satisfied with his words "But no, by your Lord, they will not believe until they make you judge concerning that over which they dispute among themselves and then find within themselves no discomfort from what you have judged" 65 Alnessaa.  
There are verses that command us to respond to him "respond to Allah and to the Messenger when he calls you to that which gives you life." 24 Alanfal.  
There're verses which order us to follow what the Prophet's ordered or forbade. There are so many verses regarding that.  
So if I abide by Quran I would know that it ordered us to abide by Sunnah?  
Yes! the Quran obliges you, it orders you to refer to the Prophet (PBUH), respond to his command, follow him, and avoid what he prohibited. The Quran tells you all of that.   
So, without having a valid criterion, Sunnah, which clarifies the correct understanding of the Quran, there would be someone saying that being a polytheist is alright. This is their understanding of Quran!  
Actually we see that happening!  
Terrorists spill the blood of people, blow up mosques and kill Muslims; they use the Quran as their reference based on their understanding of it!  
If we allow everyone to come and conclude what they want, without having a criterion that shows right from wrong, we would witness such scenarios or even worse.  
Concerning the contradition between Quran and Sunnah, we should realize that there is a difference between the Quarn and your understanding of it.  
Therefore, whoever claims such a thing must consider how we understood the Quran.  
E.g., in Sahih Albukhari, the Prophet (PBUH) was bewitched by a Jewish man.   
People said that this contradicts the Quran as the Quran states that the Prophet (PBUH) was not bewitched, unlike the saying of the polytheists ... etc.  
The first point that we should understand: Those who say that this hadith is authentic have a different understanding of the Quran, the verses, and the hadith.  
How did the Islamic scholars understand that Hadith in a way that does not contradict their understanding of the Quran?  
They said that the witchcraft of the Prophet (PBUH) had a control over his body only.  
This happened before with the prophets of Allah; Satan took control over the body of Ayoub, "Indeed, Satan has touched me with hardship and torment.".   
The magicians of Pharaoh controlled the eyes of Moses (PBUH) "they seemed to him from their magic that they were moving [like snakes]. And he sensed within himself apprehension) 66 67 Taha.   
The enemies of Allah also dominated his prophets, they killed some of them by controlling their bodies only.  
Did'nt it affect the .....  
nor his transmission of the revelation. This is what we -who authenticate the Hadith- understand.   
You may disagree with us; however, do not attribute to us words we did not say!    
We did not say that the Prophet (PBUH) was bewitched, affecting his transmission or understanding of revelation.  
We did not say that!  
So the bewitching of the Prophet did not affect his mind, the revelation, the transmission of revelation, and so on?  
Yes, all that narrated in this matter is related to how it affected him physically. It did not affect the Prophet's transmission of the religion.   
Therefore, the life of the Prophet, continued as it was, and hardly anyone knew that he was bewitched except the people of his household.  
Accordingly, we can't say that the Hadith contradicts the Quran should we understand it in this way.  
We should be careful of our understanding of Hadith and Quran.  
For example, the Hadiths related to women are sometimes debated by those who did not understand it well.  
E.g., the Hadith “a Muslim's Salat (prayer) would be cut off by [the passing of] a woman, a donkey and a dog"  
This is one of the Sahih Hadiths.  
Some people reject this Hadith and believe that it insults women, putting them in the same level of dogs and donkeys.  
Before misunderstanding ir, refer to the doctors of hadith and ask them what is meant by it to realize that the meaning is completely different.  
Firstly, you should understand the meaning of cutting a prayer off.  
Cutting off the prayer here does not mean that the prayer has become invalid, the prayer is still valid.   
Then what does it mean?  
they sometimes disrupt him and may affect the reverence of the prayer.  
Therefore, the majority of scholars, despite all the hadiths related to cutting off the prayer, say that the prayer is valid even if a woman, a donkey, or a dog passes infront of the worshipper.  
Someone migh ask, why did he single out these three? The answer is that they may confuse the one praying.  
So a woman might distract him especially if he is not her guardian [Mahram]. He may be seduced by her if she passes in front of him while he is praying.   
A donkey might hurt him. Even a dog might distract him.  
 for example, their lower status, you will be upset.  
Yes, correct.  
But if you say no, the common thing is something else, then you will accept it.  
The common thing among them is that they confuse the prayer, which could spoil the spirit of the prayer.  
An evidence for this is that the Prophet was praying in his room which was very narrow, as narrated in Sahih Albukhari. Aisha said:   
"I used to stretch my legs towards the Qibla of the Prophet while the Prophet was praying;   
whenever he prostrated he touched me, and I would withdraw my legs, and whenever he stood up, I would restretch my legs.” His prayer was not cutt off!  
So, the matter is related to the distraction that may be caused to a person, and this is what the Prophet (PBUH) talked about.   
For this reason, he commanded that a prayer put on Sutrah [screen or covering] so that one would avoid such distraction.  
So, it is a different understanding.  
Another example, with regard to modern science, is the hadith of the fly.  
The Prophet said "If a house fly falls in the drink of anyone of you, he should dip it (in the drink) and take it out, for one of its wings has a disease and the other has the cure for the disease."  
Many objected and said that modern science has proven that the fly is full of germs and diseases, so how do you command us to dip it?   
Actually, there are scientific studies- some conducted by non-Muslims who are surely not biased- proved that what the hadith mentioned is true.  
Such studies proved that a fly carries with it diseases and carries as well what protect us from those diseases.   
The details are there, and books have been written about it. I just wanted to point out that there are scientific studies proving that this hadith is true.  
What if these studies did not exist?  
This is what I was going to tell you. There are studies that prove this, but the most important thing is that this way of dealing with hadith and modern science is wrong.   
Those who object should have studies that oppose what we have.  
When you tell me that the fly contains diseases, the Hadith already said that. You didn't find out anything new.  
This did not require modern laboratories to discover it, the Hadith mentioned it fourteen hundred years ago.  
But the main point is to pay attention to where you think there is a conflict.   
First thing, is it a contradiction with a scientific fact? That is, is the contradiction real?  
The second thing, does the Hadith contradict a definitive proven scientific fact?   
This second point is important. Some people would refer to unproven studies (not even a theory) and accordingly reject the Hadith on that basis!  
When it is a scientific fact, we will deal with it as a scientific fact, and we will consider understanding the hadith accordingly.   
But it is not scientifically correct to deal with a Hadith based on a study or theory, claiming that it is proven and definitive. We can't deal with narrations and news in this way!  
In addition, the Prophet only offered that as an advice; it's not obligatory!  
The Prophet (PBUH) did not compel you to do so, if you don't prefer to do that, then don't!  
Modern science has proven it is correct. However, it is just an advice.  
It happened that the Prophet (PBUH) guided to an order and found out that it was the opposite, as in the Hadith of palm trees.  
This is another issue. I'm just saying that we should look at each matter separately.  
Those who claim that the modern science opposes the hadith of the fly did not provide a proven evidence, as science supports the Hadith.  
It is not right then to deal with the Hadith as if it violated modern science.  
It is the responsibility of Faqih to infer from the text of Hadith the Islamic teachings.  
a Faqih is the one inferring whether that Hadith enails an advice or an obligation.  
By the way, one of the nice examples of this issue of inconsistency is a point that is raised a lot, and some people came to me recently discussing it.  
They asked me about the hadeeth of breastfeeding adults, telling me that Albukhari said it is permissible for a woman to breastfeed an adult.   
I told them hold on! Albukhari only narrated the Hadith.The question of whether this is permissible or not is another thing.  
You are attributing to Albukhari what he did not say. This is not allowed. He just narrated the Hadith.  
By the way, Imam Albukhari divided the hadiths into chapters. His chapters were very important and smarly-put.  
The chapters he put and how he divided the Hadiths showed how genius he was.  
He divided his writings into scientific books: "The Book of Prayer", "The Book of Purity", "The Book of Faith", and "The Book of Interpretation".   
Then within every single book like "the Book of Interpretation", he put chapters, for example, different chapters within Surat Al-Imran, and so on.  
Albukhari mentioned the hadeeth of breastfeeding the adults under a chapter where he saw that this ruling is a special one for Salim, the mawla -guardian- of Abi Hudhayfah, and that it is not a general provision.  
You should not attribute to Albukhari what he did not say!  
What is meant by that Hadith?  
Did that thing, breastfeeding the adults, happened? ye it did. but what is the ruling here?  
The Arabs, women and men before Islam, used to adopt young children, raising them as their children,   
they would give them the names of their adopted fathers and share with them the inheritance. They would be as children of their own.  
This was common before and at the beginning of Islam.  
Abu Hudhaifah and his wife, Sahla, adopted a young child, Salem. They gave him their lineage, adopted him, and raised him. They only knew him as a son, and he only knew them as a mother and a father.  
Then, a verse was revealed prohibiting adoption, ordering people to call the adopted ones by their real names.  
"Call them by [the names of] their fathers; it is more just in the sight of Allah." 5 Alahzab.   
Here, a change occurred, as Salem was still a young man in the prime of his life, but now things had changed.  
If Abu Hudhaifa died, he-Salem- would have the right to marry Umm Hudhaifa, who had been treating her throughout his life as his mother and treating her husband as his father.  
Such a situation caused some kind of embarrassment in the house of Abu Hudhaifa. Salem lived with them and had no one else but them and they had no one else but him.  
“Sahlah bint Suhail came to the Prophet and said: 'O Messenger of Allah, I see signs of displeasure on the face of Abu Hudhaifah when Salim enters upon me.” (She felt that Sallim showed signs of puberty)  
The Prophet said: “Breastfeed him.” She said: “How can I breastfeed him when he is a grown man?   
The Messenger of Allah smiled and said: “breastfeed him.”   
How did she breastfeed him? She did not breastfeed him as breastfeeding children. This is one of the common mistakes.  
But as reported by some narrators, and as it was reported by Ibn Abd al-Barr and others, she would pour out some of her milk in a vessel and send it for him to drink.  
Why did this incident happen? To solve a temporary problem that will not happen again as the adoption was ended. These parents adopted Salem who lived with them as their son.  
This problem occurred, and the Prophet (PBUH) gave them this solution to solve this temporary problem for this special case that rarely existed at that time, and it would not happen after that because the case of adoption ended.  
It is not the image that comes to mind for breastfeeding a 20-years-old adult from the breast of another woman. This image is strange.  
Yes, it is true, and therefore the majority of Muslim scholars understood from this hadith that it is specific to this case only, the case of Salem, Abu Hudhaifa and Umm Hudhaifa.  
The majority of Muslim scholars did not generalize it to anyone, and none of the later Muslim scholars disagreed with them.  
This is the hadith of adult breastfeeding, its understanding, its origin, and these are its circumstances which Al-Bukhari narrated in his book. This is how Muslim jurists explained it.  
Regardless of all of that mentioned, some would still use that Hadith incorrectly and tarnish the image of Albukhari for a Hadith he just narrated.  
Al-Bukhari narrated the Hadith as it really happened. He referred to the jurists to see if this is allowedt, they said no and said that it is a special case which came to treat a rare problem.  
Actually, if we consider the context of that story, we would realize how our religion sought to solve the great issues faced by the people.  
When someone objects without knowing all of that, this strange image would come to their mind.  
Therefore, we should understand Hadiths correctly, otherwise, we would encounter mistakes and issues. Such issues could be avoided if a scientific methodology were followed.  
It has been 11 centuries since Albukhari, did not muslims have someone as good as him during such a long time?  
Could you repeat it?  
Did not muslims have someone as good as Albukhari throughout the years?  
I mean why would Muslims be protective of Albukhari?  
I believe you would only ask this question if you only consider Albukhari's book as a work by Albukhari only.  
Actually, Sahih Albukhari is not a work by Albukhari only, scientifically speaking.  
You might ask: Did someone else compose that book with him? No!  
When Albukhari composed his book, his book was examined heavily by Hadith criticism scholars.  
Hundreds of muslim scholars have critically examined his book.  
Nowadays, however, to be qualified to receive your Master's or PhD for your thesis, it would be examined by only 3 experts to be qualified and validated.  
This is how it is done today.  
Unlike that, Sahih Albukhari was examined not only by 3, or 30 or even 300 experts;  
Actually, it has been examined ever since it was composed till this date by hundreds and thousands of experts and scholars from different fields.  
So, it was scientifically reviewed since the time of Albukhari.  
When one of Albukhari's students, Imam Alnisai was asked about one of the narrators mentioned in Albukhari's book,   
he replied that Sahih Albukhari is the best of all Sunnah's books, although Alnisai had his own book of Sunnah.  
The book has gone through extensive scientific review by many experts.  
Each expert would critically review the book and then validate it as the best in addressing Sunnah.  
A huge number of experts and jurists from different religious schools, and throughout various countries and times agree that his book is a Sunnah resource for every muslim.  
Albukhari did not acquire status for being a noted scholar, although he was, he acquired it as his book was validated by scholars.  
By the way, the scholars who studied and examined his book did not glorify Albukhari;  
Some scholars admitted that Albukhari was a prominent Imam an scholar, yet they disagreed with him regarding some Hadiths.  
For example, Imam Al-Daraqutni and other scholars disagreed with Albukhari on a few Hadiths.  
Al-Daraqutni for instance addressed a few Hadiths and clarified that he disagreed with Al Bukhari regarding them.  
Very few Hadiths.  
In a book by Dr. Mustafa Bahu, he compiled the Hadiths from the Sahihayn (The Two Sahihs) which were addressed by Hadith scholars;  
he examined and methodologically examined those Hadiths.  
The Hadiths by Albukhari that were addressed in that book were 152 or 156 out of 2609 Hadiths;  
that is only about 5%.  
Scholars disagreed with around 5% of Hadiths compiled by Albukhari.   
However, other scholars who came after the ones disagreeing with Albukhari clarified that Albukhari was right in those Hadiths.  
I'm just telling you that there were disagreements whether they were right or wrong.  
So, all the scholars who followed Albukhari believe that 95% of his Hadiths are validated.  
Such a scientific review granted Albukhari's work its high status, being very important.  
Albukhari was a knowledgeable, well-informed, and a skilled writer Imam, also, his works were scientifically reviewed throughout different generations.  
Therefore, there are no other books extensively considered throughout Islam's history like the book of Albukhari.  
The manuscripts we've got today, according to the Catalogue of Arabic Heritage indexes by Aal Al-Bayt (one of the most popular indexes), are more than 2300 manuscripts,  
It only addressed the indexed ones; there are so many unindexed libraries that were not addressed.  
The indexed libraries include more than 2300 copies of hand-written manuscripts of Sahih Albukhari throughout different countries and times and by different writers.  
Are these copies identical?  
Definitely, they are scientifically identical.  
There could be a miswriting in a copy, however, the different copies were not contradictory.  
There were no differences among these copies.  
Are those copies  
You may refer to the Catalogue I just mentioned. You would find information of each manuscript: The library where it's kept, its microfilm, its date... etc.  
That's why muslims consider Sahih Albukhari  as the most authentic book after the Quran.  
That is only an example of how Muslims have had a great interest in Albukhari's book.  
Further more, the interest of muslims in that book led them to author books that are related to Sahih Albukhari.   
A number of scholars conducted a study to clarify how the 6 canonical books were followed by other works related to them.  
They found that Sahih Albukhari was followed by more than 650 books that tackled that book scientifically.  
650 books! such books were of many volumes, such as the 20-volume book  "Fath al-Bari" by Imam Ibn Hajar.  
"Fath al-Bari" is one out of 650 books.  
Such books served Sahih Albukhari in different ways, they provided explanations, footnotes, rectifications, evaluation of narrators, evaluation of those who narrated about Albukhari ... etc.  
Such books served Sahih Abukhari in 40 different ways.  
Some of such books tackled the Arabic language in Sahih Albukhari and provided explanations with repect to that.  
Interestingly, some books included poems that would make it easy for students to memorize the Hadiths compiled by Albukhari, and to memorize the narrators in his book.  
So, there are many books authored to serve as appendices of Sahih Albukhari.  
For example, there is a book explaining the complicated strange words in Sahih Albukhari.  
Even the debated Hadiths in Sahih Albukhari were tackled in one book.  
Another book collected all the narrators mentioned in Sahih Albukhari as "a man of the companions".  
Such books tackled different aspects of Sahih Albukhari.  
So, Sahih Albukhari reached the highest level as it was extensively studied and examined.  
Sahih Albukhari was the top superior book of Sunnah as it has been continuously validated; it proved its strength compared to other books.  
The book deserved all the attention by muslims across the world. We should not be surprised that it has been heavily addressed in different works.  
Therefore, some Islamic scholars stated that the Hadiths mentioned in Sahih Albukhari are 100% authentic.  
However, other scholars believe that not all of them are certinely authentic, yet they are of various categories.   
They say that some Hadiths in Sahih Albukhari are validated by the consensus of Islamic scholars; they include no issues.  
So, the scholars have different positions with that regard, some say that they are 100% authentic yet others disagree with that. The latter one is the most likely one, according to Ibn Hajar and others.  
Sahih Albukhari gained its reputation as it was scientifically reviewed, studied, and examined since the day it was authored till this date. A number of huge works tackled that book.  
Sadly, those who reject Albukhary or attack him or his work have no idea about all what I've just mentioned.  
Albukhari had worked with other great scholars and learned from them.   
So, the science of Hadith reached its peak back then before Albukhari. When Albukhari started working in that field, he reached the top of that peak.  
Sure, the hadiths he compiled in his book were always there whether before or after his book.  
However, the great efforts of Albukhari were in filtering the most valid and authentic Hadiths to compile them in his book.  
It's important to note that Albukhari did not state that he collected all the Sahih Hadiths, he compiled what he could.  
Albukhari's masterpiece entailed compiling in his book the most authentic Hadithats that were thouroghly examined and validated. His book was validated through a scientific methodology by Islamic scholars.   
The Hadiths he included in his book were already narrated by the ones before him; he validated them.  
By the way, the printed books by Albukhari's Sheikhs, such as "Musnad Ahmad" and "Musnad Al-Humaydi", had already mentioned the Hadiths included in Albukhari's book.  
Those Hadiths were also included in the books by scholars before Albukhari, e.g., "Muwatta Imam Malik" and "Musannaf of Abd Al-Razzaq".  
What about the scholars after him?  
They were also included in the books of scholars after Albukhari.  
One of the interesting works that tackled Sahih Albukhari clarified the extracts of it.  
Do you know what I mean by Extracts?  
A scholar- lets say who comes the 2nd in the Isnad of Albukhari- would extract each Hadith in Albukhari's and narrate them on the authority of someone other than Albukhari; ensuring that he was not the only one narrating that Hadith.  
E.g., the Hadith “Actions are to be judged only by intentions" was narrated by Albukhari on the authority of Alhumaidi on the authority of Sufyan Ibn Uyaynah on the authority of Yahya bin Sa'id Alansari.  
To make sure that this Hadith was not only narrated by Albukhari and that they are authentic, a scholar would try to trace the Hadith with a chain of transmission that does not include Albukhari.  
Therefore, there isn't even one word in Albukhari's compiled Hadiths that were not mentioned in other works by other scholars.  
Therefore, all the great efforts exerted for Sahih Al Bukhari qualified it to be the most important Sunnah resource for Muslims.  
Surely there are narrators other than Albukhari, and there are other important books of Sunnah; yet Sahih Albukhari topped them all, taking into consideration what we've mentioned before.  
So, there isn't any Hadith exclusively included in Albukhari's?  
All the Hadiths in Albukhari's were already mentioned in other scholars' books, He did not mention any exclusive Hadith.  
Not even an exclusive narration?  
Yes, I mean the narrations of the Prophet (PBUH).  
Even the narrations that Albukhari would mention as a comment on a Hadith.   
Albukhari would include in a Chapter some notes and references. Geniusus are good with references and summaries; Albukhari was a genius.  
I would give you a good example.  
In his book "ٍPrayers [Salat]", he included a Chapter titled "ٌRuling in Praying at a Church"  
Is it permissible to pray in a church?  
Albukhari narrated that Um Salama told the Prophet (PBUH) about a church which she had seen in Ethiopia. She told him about the pictures which she had seen in it. The prophet said:   
"If any righteous pious man dies amongst them, they would build a place of worship at his grave and make these pictures in it; they are the worst creatures in the sight of Allah."  
How is that narrated Hadith related to praying in a church!  
To clarify what he wanted to address, Albukhari added a comment. He called that Chapter "Praying in a Church" and added a comment of a narration without its isnad (as it is mentioed somewhere else).  
He added a narration by Umar (RA) who said "We are not praying in your churches because of the Pictures or statues in it"  
Albukhari added that Ibn Abbas prayed in a church that had no pictures or statues.  
Albukhari added those 2 narrations of Umar and Ibn Abbas as a comment.  
He added along with those narrations the Hadith of the Prophet (PBUH).  
What he wanted to clarify by doing so that the issue regarding praying in a church is the pictures and statues in it; not the church itself.  
This technique of his required a skill.  
Interestingly, even that technique in Albukhari's book was tackled by some scholars' books; they sought to clarify the Isnad of such narrations that were added in his comments.  
E.g., Ibn Hajar authored a book titled "Commentary Closed [Taghliq Alta'liq]" in which he addressed the Isnad of every narration mentioend in Albukhari's book as a comment.  
Albukhari deserved all those services offered by Muslim scholars that would assist his works.   
Such works that followed the books of Albukhari played a big role of the great attention paid to Albukhari by muslims around the world.  
Through Albukhari's work, we can see how muslims put great effort to protect the Prophet's Sunnah in order to follow it.  
So, do we get Sunnah only from Albukhari's? of course not, yet Albukhari's works were of great importance.  
You consider any attack on Albukhari to be an attack on the Sunnah’s methodology and scholars.  
People who criticize Albukhari could be categorized under different categories.  
We should be fair to them.  
Some do not believe in the Prophet (PBUH) and are atheists or non-Muslims.  
They criticize Albukhari and his hadiths while their problem is not with albukhari, but rather with believing in the Prophet (PBUH) in the first place, besides their ignorance in their objection.   
Some objectors are those who object because they do not believe in the Prophet’s Sunnah as a source of Islamic teachings.  
Similar to the first group, their problem is not with Albukhari; rather with the Prophet’s Sunnah being a source of Islamic teachings.  
Finally, some objectors believe in the Prophet’s Sunnah as a source of Islamic teachings; yet, they believe that some hadiths have issues and should not be considered valid.   
This group is different than the first and second groups.   
Indeed, most of these people criticize Albukhari based on weak scientific facts.  
Although most objections are scientifically weak,  I can't equate all the groups.  
Generally, those who reject the strongest and most correct books on the Prophet’s Sunnah, in terms of transmission and defense, are somehow rejecting the Sunnah of the Prophet even if they do not want to.  
How is that?  
To prove that claim to that group, let us suppose we exclude Sahih al-Bukhari; what alternative do we have in knowing the correct Sunnah of the Prophet (PBUH)?   
Could you name a valid strong alternative methodology? There are no other alternatives as goog as Albukhari’s.  
Therefore, even if they did not want to reject the Prophet’s Sunnah, they would do so once they reject Sahih Albukhari which is the best work of Sunnah.  
I understood from this interview that none had published a book like Sahih Albukhari for eleven centuries, as it is a comprehensive resource for the Sunnah.  
I would like to highlight an important fact. Not all authentic hadiths are found in Sahih al-Bukhari.  
That is why his student, Imam Muslim, composed his Sahih al-Jami’ after him, in which there are hadiths that are not found in the book of his sheikh and are indeed authentic.  
Imam Ibn Khuzaymah, also one of his students, composed his book Sahih Ibn Khuzaymah, which contains hadiths that Ibn Khuzaymah considered authentic and are not in al-Bukhari’s nor Muslim’s.  
Even Ibn Hibban, a student of Ibn Khuzaymah, composed a book called "Sahih Ibn Hibban", which included some hadiths that weren't mentioned in Al-Bukhari’s, Muslim’s, nor Ibn Khuzaymah’s. These are all printed books.   
Imam Al-Hakim came after them and composed a huge voluminous book entitled “Al-Mustadrak Ala Alsahihayn”.  
There is an interesting reason behind its authoring.  
It is said that people came to him at that time and claimed that there was no Hadith marked as Sahih and not included in either Sahih Al-Bukhari or Muslim.  
Imam Al-Hakim confirmed that Sahih Al-Bukhari and Muslim are the most important resources for the Prophet's authentic Hadiths; however, they are not including all the authentic ones.  
To prove that, he challenged those people by composing a book that would include Sahih Hadiths that were not included in the 2 Sahihs, and to collect hadiths that were from the same Isnad of the 2.  
He compiled a huge encyclopedia containing thousands of authentic Hadiths of the Prophet.   
by such books and others, scholars tried to collect more authentic hadiths, yet they were not comparable to those of al-Bukhari and Muslim who followed him.  
In terms of strength, if we rank them, the strength of Sahih Muslim is slightly lower than Albukhari's;  Sahih Ibn Khuzaymah is lower than Albukhari's and Muslim's.  
Ibn Hibban would come 4th in rank, followed by Al-Hakim which is slightly lower than the former.   
So, are there other books that contain authentic hadiths? The answer would be yes.   
However, regarding strong authentic hadiths, there is no doubt that the best book in this regard is Sahih Albukhari.  
The strength of his book is incomparable and unique.  
Once more, there are other books of Sahih Hadiths that are available today and known by scholars of Hadith.  
May Allah be pleased with Albukhari and reward him for his works that were of great importance to the Muslim worlds.  
I am impressed how you improvised without reading anything for 3 hours. You said that Albukhari was a genius, I see that you are one as well. We had no breaks (YouTube Ads weren't breaks). Thanks.  
   
Thank you for being with us today. Now, I know Al-Bukhari better and I understand why you get upset when someone attacks and criticizes him.   
It's as if you see the sun crystal clear in front of you, yet someone would tell you they can't see it. It is not there!  
Actually, every specialist in any science will get upset if faced with unscientific criticism by non-specialists.   
Undoubtedly, this is the reaction of all scholars who follow a critical methodology if they see the unjustified attack on Imam Albukhari.  
Despite the interview's length, I do not believe that 3 hours covered everything related to Sahih Albukhari.  
 I believe that there are some unanswered questions about Sahih al-Bukhari, yet we sought to shed more light briefly on that book.  
We answered only some of the questions; but I claim that every question an objector raises about Sahih al-Bukhari has a valid scientific answer.  
I urge every objector to seek answers from the people of knowledge to obtain a satisfactory answer;  
I hope that this long interview was interesting for our listeners or viewers; well, it was interesting for me perhaps because of my passion for Imam Albukhari.  
I pray that we meet him, our scholars, and our Prophet (PBUH) in the  Paradise.  
May Allah grant us love of the Prophet's Sunnah, and help us to be followers and defenders of it.  
May Allah grant us the will to abide by the Quran and Sunnah.  
Thank you for having me today. Thank you for yor time.  
Shall we have our suhoor?   
Thank you! Thank you all! Thanks to the great team of "Morabaa".  
Abdel-Karim Al-Adwani worked on the preparation for this episode.  
 Photography by Nayef Shar. Editing by Rayan Bakil and Jamil Abdel-Ahad.  
Audio recording by Kholoud Halabi.  
Audio engineering by Youssef Ibrahim  
Production by Ayman Khaled and Razan Dehaytham.   
Special thanks to those who are currently with us here. They have worked for three hours, each in his field, at this late time in Ramadan.  
Despite their need for suhoor, they are with us here.  
Thank you all.  
Thank you "Morabaa" friends, stay tuned for next week. Take care of yourselves.