A Gift of Precious Gems Bukhari Intro SH Fadhlur Rahman Final 20 FEB 2024

A Gift of Precious Gems
For The Students of Imām Bukhārī’s Ṣaḥīḥ

An Introduction to Ṣaḥīḥ Al-Bukhārī
With Supplementary Notes from Hadāyad Darārī fī Durūsil Bukhārī: The Lectures of
Ḥazrat Mawlānā Fazlur Rahman Sahib Azmi (May Allāh preserve him)
Shaykhul Ḥadīth
Hazrat Mawlānā Fazlur Rahman Sahib Azmi
Azaadville South Africa
(May Allāh preserve him)
This introduction consists of important and very beneficial information with regards to Imām Bukhārī and his
Jāmiʿ Ṣaḥīḥ which has been compiled from various reliable and authentic books.
The tarājim abwāb (chapter titles) of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī, its chains of transmission, along with important
knowledgeable discussions with regards to the common commentaries of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī, have been discussed
fruitfully in a most beautiful manner.
There is hope that by studying it, the students of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī receive insight and they gain the understanding
of the high status of Jāmiʿ Ṣaḥīḥ.
Darul Iman Institute Barbados

Book Title:
A Gift of Precious Gems For the Students of Imām Bukhārī’s Ṣaḥīḥ
Compiled by:
Shaykhul Hadith Hazrat Mawlana Fazlur Rahman Sahib Azmi (May
Allāh preserve him)
Translated by:
Students of Baitul Ilm wal Amal
Markaz Daʿwatul Haq Barbados
Supervised by:
Darul Iman Institute
Barbados
[email protected]
[email protected]
First Edition: Jumādal-ʾŪlā 1444/December 2022
Distributed by:
Darul Iman Institute
Flint Hall House
Flint Hall, St. Michael, Barbados
All rights reserved. Aside from fair use, meaning a few pages or less for non-
profit educational purposes, review, or scholarly citation, no part of this
publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in
any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or
otherwise, without the prior permission of the copyright owner.
If you see any mistakes in this book, or if you have any comments or
suggestions, please feel free to contact us. Jazākallāhu Khairā.
Available at:
Darul Iman (Daʿwatul Haq)

Flint Hall House, Flint Hall, St.Michael
Bridgetown, Barbados
II
Tel: (+1246) 8204437
Email: [email protected]
Idarah Ihyaa us Sunnah

9362 Azaadville 1750 South Africa
Tel. Fax +27 11 413 2661
Tel: +413 2414
Ihyaa us Sunnah (Bolton, UK)
IUS, 140 Blackburn Road
BOLTON BL 1 8DR. Greater Manchester
Tel: +44120 438 8864
Cell: +44 783 323 0540
Email: [email protected]
TRANSLITERATION KEY
‫ء‬ ʾ (a slight catch in ‫ط‬ ṭ
breath)
ٰ‫ا‬
ٰ ā (elongated sound) ‫ظ‬ ẓ (heavy dh, with full
mouth)
‫ب‬ b ‫ع‬ ʿ, ʿa, ʿi, ʿu (like two a’s, e’s
or o’s from deep throat)
‫ت‬ t ‫غ‬ gh (like French r, with full

mouth)
III
‫ث‬ th (as in thin) ‫ف‬ f
‫ج‬ j ‫ق‬ q (a guttural q, with full

mouth)
‫ح‬ ḥ (tensely breathed h) ‫ك‬ k
‫خ‬ kh (ch in Scottish loch, ‫ل‬ l

with full mouth)
‫م‬ m
‫د‬ d ‫ن‬ n
‫ذ‬ dh (the soft th in the) ‫و‬ w
‫ر‬ r ْٰ
‫و‬ ū
ٰ‫مدية‬
ٰ
‫ز‬ z ‫ه‬ h
‫س‬ s ٰ‫ي‬ y
‫متحركة‬
‫ش‬ sh ْٰ‫ي‬ ī
ٰ‫مدية‬
‫ص‬ ṣ (heavy s, with full ٰ‫ياء‬ y
mouth)
‫لينة‬
‫فتحة‬ a
‫ض‬ ḍ (heavy d, with full ‫ضمة‬ u

mouth)
‫كسرة‬ i
A Warm Welcome to the Guests of Nabī n

ِ‫أ َ ْهالً َوسَ ْه ًال بِاللَّ ِذيْنَ أ َ َودُّهُ ْم ٭ َوأُحِ بُّ ُه ْم فِي هللاِ ذِي ْاْل ََلء‬
IV
A warm welcome to those whom I love and cherish for the sake of Allāh, the Most
Bountiful.
ِ‫ى ٭ غُ ِ ِّر ْال ُو ُج ْو ِه َوزَ ي ِْن كُ ِِّل َمالَء‬

ً ‫ي تُق‬ َ ‫أ َ ْهالً بِقَ ْو ٍم‬
ْ ‫صالِحِ يْنَ ذَ ِو‬
Welcome to the pious, god-fearing group whose faces shine radiantly-the
adornment of every gathering.
ِ‫س ِك ْينَ ٍة َو َحيَاء‬ ِ ‫ب ْال َح ِد ْي‬

َ ‫ث ِب ِعفَّ ٍة ٭ َوت ََوقُّ ٍر َو‬ ِ َ‫طل‬
َ ‫يَ ْس َع ْونَ فِ ْي‬
Those who are striving in the pursuit of ḥadīth, with chastity, dignity, tranquility
and modesty.
ِ‫صاء‬
َ ْ‫اإلح‬
ِ ‫ع ِن‬
َ ‫ت‬ َ َ‫لَ ُه ُم ْال َم َهابَةُ َو ْال َجالَلَةُ َوالنُّهى٭ َوف‬
ْ َّ‫ضائِ ُل َجل‬
Awe-inspiring, honourable and intelligent; for them are virtues innumerable.
ِ‫ش َهدَاء‬ َ ‫ي بِ ِه أ َ ْق َال ُم ُه ْم ٭ أ َ ْزكى َوأ َ ْف‬

ْ ‫ض ُل‬
ُّ ‫مِن دَ ِم ال‬ ْ ‫َجْر‬
ِ ‫َو ِمدَاد ُ َما ت‬
The ink flowing from their pens is purer and superior to the blood spilling from
martyrs.
ِ‫ي ُم َح َّم ٍد ٭ َما أ َ ْنت ُ ْم َوس َِواكُ ْم بِسَ َواء‬ِِّ ‫طا ِل ِب ْي ع ِْل َم النَّ ِب‬
َ ‫يَا‬
O seekers of the knowledge of the Prophet Muḥammad (n), others cannot be

compared to you.
Abū Bakr Ibn Durayd Al-ʾAzdī
V
ENDORSEMENT BY
Ḥazrat Mawlānā Fazlur Rahman Ṣāḥib Azmi 1 ‫دامتٰ بركاتهم‬
ّ ‫الرحمٰ ن‬
‫الرحيم‬ ّ ‫بسم هللا‬
.‫ أما بعد‬،‫نحمده ونصلى على رسوله الكريم‬
For quite a long time, there was a need for “Hadiyyatud Darārī liṭālibī Ṣaḥīḥ al-
Bukhārī (Muqaddamah Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī)” to be rendered in English so that
those who do not know Urdu can also gain the opportunity to benefit from it.
Alḥamdulillāh, it has been translated under the supervision of Muftī Ahmed
Saeed ṣāḥib ‫ سلمہ‬from Barbados. A few other ʿulāmāʾ have also reviewed it.
Additionally, Muftī Muhammad ibn Ismāʾīl Bhikha ‫ سلمہ‬has documented
supplementary notes which I delivered during dars and included them in
volume one of “Hadāyad Darārī fī durūs Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī”. These documented
lectures of Bukhārī have also been published [in Urdu]. These [supplementary
notes] have also been translated into English and referenced as ‘Ifādātush
Shaykh’.
May Allāh l accept the services of these individuals and may He make it a
means of guidance, salvation and forgiveness for me. Āmīn. This English
translation of “Hadiyyatud Darārī” is ready to be published. May Allāh l
reward the well-wishers and all those who assisted with goodness and May
He grant this book acceptance. Āmīn.
Fazlur Rahman Azmi

Azaadville
27 Jūmadal-ʾŪlā 1444
22 December 2022
1 This is a translation of Ḥazrat’s ‫ حفظه هللا‬endorsement of ‘A Gift of Precious Gems’ originally written in Urdu.
VII
k
FOREWORD
‫ ومن‬،‫ من يهده هللا فال مضل له‬،‫ ونعوذ باهلل من شرور أنفسنا ومن سيئات أعمالنا‬،‫ نحمده ونستعينه ونستغفره‬،‫إن الحمد هلل‬
:‫ أما بعد‬.‫ وأشهد أن َل إله إَل هللا وحده َل شريك له وأشهد أن محمد عبده ورسوله‬،‫يضلل فال هادي له‬
Alḥamdulillāh, under the tawwajjuh of Ḥazrat Mawlānā Fazlur Rahman

Azmi ṣāḥib ‫دامت بركاتهم‬, we commenced the honourable task of
translating Ḥazrat’s beautiful kitāb, ‘Hadiyyatud Darārī’, from Urdu
into English.
During the translating and editing process, it became very apparent,
how much of a precious gem this kitāb indeed is, how in-depth its
words are and the vast benefit a reader can acquire from it. Ḥazrat
Mawlānā Fazlur Rahman ṣāḥib’s ‫ دامت بركاتهم‬insightfulness, his
dedication and effort shine brightly throughout each page of the
compilation.
Any student of Ḥazrat Mawlānā Fazlur Rahman ṣāḥib ‫ دامت بركاتهم‬can
attest to how dear this kitāb and its notes are to Ḥazrat and the
enthusiasm with which Ḥazrat would teach the class!
Alḥamdulillāh thumma alḥamdulillāh, as the editing process
progressed, we were fortunate to acquire the valuable supplementary
notes of Ḥazrat Mawlānā Fazlur Rahman ṣāḥib via my cousin, Muftī
Muhammad Bhikha who is currently compiling Ḥazrat’s durūs of Ṣaḥīḥ
Bukhārī, titled ‘Hadāyad Darāri fī Durūsil Ṣaḥiḥ Al-Bukhārī’. May Allāh
l accept his efforts and grant him the ability to complete the
compilation. Āmīn.
These are supplementary notes which Ḥazrat Mawlānā would expand
on whilst teaching the kitāb, ‘Hadiyyatud Darārī’. Alḥamdulillāh, they
were added to this English translation, thereby allowing the kitāb to be
of greater benefit to the reader inshaʾAllāh.
VIII
Note: These supplementary notes which have been documented
from the durūs of Ḥazrat ‫ حفظه هللا‬have been included in a different
colour and have been referenced in this English translation as
‘Ifādātush Shaykh’. The written footnotes of Ḥazrat ‫ حفظه هللا‬are
printed in black and have been referenced with ‘Fazl’ or ‘Fazlur
Rahman’ just as Ḥazrat ‫ حفظه هللا‬has referred to it in the original
Urdu.
We supplicate to Allāh l, that through this kitāb, readers will
inshāʾAllāh be granted understanding of the depth and characteristics
of the great kitāb, ‘Ṣaḥīḥ Al-Bukhārī’.
A special acknowledgement to the Ṭālibāt of Dārul Imān’s, Baitul ʿIlm
wal ʿAmal, who, with their endless effort and dedication, were
instrumental in bringing this kitāb to fruition and also to my classmate,
Muftī Abdullah Moolla, who reviewed and assisted with the editing
process.
May Allāh l abundantly reward them and all who were involved in the
production of this translation and grant us all maghfirah through the
barakah of this kitāb.
May Allāh l forgive our families and, through this kitāb, allow our
names to be included amongst the legacy of those muḥaddithūn who
preserve and safeguard the aḥādīth of our beloved Nabī n. ‫آمين ثمّ آمين‬
Ahmed Saeed Adam
Darul Iman Institute,
Barbados
13th Jumādal-ʾŪlā 1444
Friday, 8th December 2022
IX
6
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TOPIC Pg.
Blessed Words and Marginalia: Ḥazrat Mawlānā Muḥammad ʿAbdur Rashīd Nuʿmānī
1 1
v- Karāchī
Endorsement by Mawlānā ʿAbdul Ḥaq Ṣāḥib Aʿẓmī v - Shaykh-ul- Ḥadīth of Dārul
2 3
ʿUlūm Deoband
3 Endorsement by Mawlānā Niʿmatullāh Ṣāḥib Maʿrūfī Aʿẓmī‫ مد ظله‬- Deoband 5
Endorsement by Ḥazrat Muftī Nizāmuddīn Ṣāḥib Shāmizī v - Binori Town
4 8
Karāchī
5 Endorsement by Ḥazrat Doctor ʿAlī Aṣghar v -Islāmabād 10
6 Author’s Note 12
7 The Life of Imām Bukhārīv (Muḥammad ibn Ismāʿīl) 15
8 Name and Lineage 15
9 Pronunciation of ‫بردازبه‬: An opinion of a Russian Scholar 15
10 Imām Bukhārī’s v Father Ismāʿīl and Ḥammād ibn Zayd 17
11 Ismāʿīl v and Abū Ḥafṣ Kabīr Ḥanafī v 21
12 Birth and Early Life 25
13 Karāmah (The Miracle) of Regaining Vision After Becoming Blind 26
14 Seeking Knowledge 26
15 Travels for Knowledge 30
16 Ḥajj Journey 30
17 Cities He Travelled to 32
18 The Beginning of Authoring & Compiling Books 35
19 Imām Bukhārī’s v Teachers 35
20 The Five Categories of Imām Bukhārī’s v Shuyūkh (Teachers) 39
21 Imām Bukhārī’s: ‫( اربع في اربع‬Four in Four) [An Interesting Story] 42
22 Imām Bukhārī’s v Mashāyikh (Teachers) mentioned in Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī 46
23 His Unparalleled Memory [Stories] 47
24 Various stories Regarding his Character and Qualities 53
25 Tarāwīḥ and Tahajjud 60
26 The Grief Experienced on the Death of Imām Dārimī v and the Poems Recited 62
XI
27 Praises from the People of Knowledge 64
28 Some Statements of Contemporaries and His Students 70
29 Glad tidings of Following the Messenger of Allāh n 73
30 The Students and Disciples of Imām Bukhārī v 74
31 Narrators of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī (Firabrī etc.) 75
32 Imām Bukhārī’s v School of Thought 81
33 Many of Imām Bukhārī’s v Teachers were Ḥanafī 83
34 Mention of ʿAbdullāh ibn Mubārak v 83

35 Thulāthiyyāt 84,144
36 Our Opinion Regarding Imām Bukhārī’s v School of Thought 89

Supplement- The schools of Thought of the Five Authors (Muslim, Tirmidhī, Abū
37 90
Dāwūd, Nasāʾi, Ibn Mājah ‫)رحمهم هللا‬
38 Imām Bukhārī v and The Aḥnāf 97
The narrations of Ḥumaydī, Nuʿaym ibn Ḥammād, Ismāʿīl ibn ʿArʿarah, and their
39 98
Answers
40 The Opinion of Imām Bukhārī v Regarding Imām Abū Ḥanīfah v 108
41 The Statements of the Scholars Regarding the Reliability of Imām Abū Ḥanīfah v 110
42 The Reality of the Accusation of Irjāʾ 113
43 Yūsuf ibn Khālid Simtī, (and) Asad ibn ʿAmr 114
The Accusation of Imām Bukhārī v in his book “Khayr ul Kalām” towards Imām 115
44
Abū Ḥanīfah v
45 Why did Bukhārī v Not Narrate from Imām ʿAẓam v and Imām Shāfiʿī v? 116
46 The Trials of Imām Bukhārī v and the Incident of his Death 118
47 Leaving Nayshāpur 122
48 Return to Bukhārā and Differences With The Leader of Bukhārā 123
49 His stay in Khartang and His Demise 124
50 The Emitting of Fragrance from his Grave 126
51 The Date of his Death and Two Couplets 127
52 A Lesson 128
53 The Details of His Trials (His Departure from Bukhārā Four Times) 129
54 Books authored by Imām Bukhārī v 133
55 Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī and its Specialties 140
Where was Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī Written and the Great Regard with which it was
56 142
Written
XII
57 Reading Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī When In Difficulty 143
58 The Thulāthiyyāt of Bukhārī 144,84
59 The Thulāthiyyāt of Ibn Mājah, Tirmidhī and Abū Dāwūd 144

60 The Thulāthiyyāt, Thunāʿiyyāt Wahdāniyyāt of Imām Abū Ḥanīfah v 145
61 The Definition of Jāmiʿ and the Difference of Opinion Regarding this Definition 147
62 The Motivation Behind the Compilation of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī 149
63 The Compilations Before Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī 149
64 The Objective of Compiling Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī 155
65 The Different Forms of the Tarājim Abwāb [Chapter Titles] 158
66 The Objectives of the Five Imāms 159
The Conditions of Imām Bukhārī v in Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī and the Authenticity of
67 162
Bukhārī
68 Kawtharī’s Review on the Statements of Maqdisī and Ḥāzmī 163
69 Ḥākim’s Claim Regarding the Conditions of Ṣaḥīḥayn and Refuting Ḥākim 166
70 A Summary of Maqdisī and Ḥāzmī’s Refutation 167
71 The Explanation of Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar v and its Weakness 170
72 Details of Imām Bukhārī’s v Conditions 171

73 The Five Categories of Narrators 172
74 The Explanation of Mudallisīn 176
75 Examples of Inqiṭaʿ and Iḍṭirāb in Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī 178
76 An Important Question and Answer 180
77 Some Important Notes 182
78 The Beneficial Conclusion of Ibn Humām 184
79 Mawlānā Ẓafar Aḥmad ʿUthmānī’s Discourse & the Summary of The Discussion 187
80 Awhām (Mistakes) in Bukhārī 188
81 The Valuable Insight of the Author of “Anwārul Bārī” 188
82 Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī: The Most Authentic Book 189
83 A Further Discussion on the Statement of Abū ʿAlī Nayshāpūrī 192
84 Ṣanʿānī’s Refutation & A Note of Caution 195
85 Who Are ‘Some of the Maghāribah’? 197
86 Criticism of Dārquṭnī’s Statement 199
87 The Details of Bukhārī’s Superiority over Muslim 200
88 The Condition of Ittiṣāl in a Muʿanʿan Narration 204
89 The Difference of Opinion Between Imām Bukhārī v and Imām Muslim v 204
XIII
90 Imām Muslim’s Objection (The Objection of Imām Muslim Is Correct) 207
91 Muwaṭṭāʾ Imām Mālik and Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī 211
92 Mawlānā Nuʿmānī’sv Analysis on Ḥāfiẓ's Research 212
93 Important Note 215
94 Why is There Repetition in Bukhārī? 216
95 Why Is There Taqṭīʿ in Bukhārī? 219
96 The Number of Aḥādīth in Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī 220
97 Ibn Ṣalāh's and Nawawī’s Statement and Ibn Ḥajar’s Research 221
98 Differences of Opinion 224
99 Kutub and Abwāb (Books and Chapters) 226
Are the Aḥādīth of Ṣaḥīḥayn Mufīd Yaqīn [Do They Give the Benefit of Definite
100 228
Knowledge]?
101 The Answer to Ibn Ṣalāh's Evidence 233
102 Manifestation of Truth 239
103 Statements of Ibn Taymiyyah v and ʿAllāmah Anwar Shāh Kashmīrī v 241
104 The Narrations of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī Which have been Criticised 246
105 Concise Answer 247
106 Detailed Answer 248
107 The Mutakallam Fīh Narrators in Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī 252
108 The Taʿlīqāt of Bukhārī 258
109 Examples of Ṣaḥīḥ, Ḥasan and Ḍaʿīf 261
110 The Total Number of Taʿlīqāt and Mawqūf Narrations 263
111 The Coherence of Arrangement of the Chapters in Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī 265
112 Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī’s Tarājim (Chapter Titles) 279
113 Books Written on the Tarājim of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī 286
114 Fifteen Principles of Ḥazrat Shaykh-ul-Hind v 289
115 The Commentaries of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī 310
116 The Author’s Sanad of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī 358
117 Biographies of the Illustrious Mashāyikh of Ḥadīth Found in our Sanad 367
118 Mawlānā ʿAbdul Laṭīf Nuʿmānī Aʿẓmī v 368
119 Muḥaddith Kabīr ʿAllāmah Mawlānā Ḥabīb-ur-Raḥmān Ṣāḥib Aʿẓmī v 374

120 Mawlānā Karīm Bakhsh Sanbhalī v 391
121 Shaykh-ul-Hind Mawlānā Maḥmūd Ḥasan Deobandī v 394
XIV
122 Ḥujjat-ul-Islām Mauānā Muḥammad Qāsim Nanotwī v 398
123 Imām Rabbānī Mawlānā Rashīd Aḥmad Gangohī v 402
124 Shāh ʿAbdul Ghanī Mujaddidi Dehlawī Muhājir Madanī v 407
125 Musnidul Hind Shāh Muḥammad Isḥāq Dehlawī Makkī v 410
126 Shāh ʿAbdul ʿAzīz Muḥaddith Dehlawī v 413
127 Shāh Walīullāh Muḥaddith Dehlawī v 418
128 Shaykh Abū Ṭāhir Kurdī Madanī v 425
129 Shaykh Ibrāhīm ibn Ḥasan Kurdī Kūrānī Madanī v 428
130 Shaykh Aḥmad ibn Muḥammad Qushāshā Mālikī Madanī v 431
131 Shaykh Aḥmad ibn ʿAlī Shināwī Miṣrī Then Madanī v 434
132 Shaykh Shamsuddīn Muḥammad ibn Aḥmed Ramlī Manūfī Miṣrī Shāfiʿī v 436
133 Shaykhul Islām Zayn-ud- Dīn Zakariyyā Anṣārī Shāfiʿī v 439
134 Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar ʿAsqalānī v 442
135 Shaykh Zayn-ud-Dīn Ibrāhīm Tanūkhī Abū Isḥāq v 445
136 Shaykh Aḥmad Al-Ḥajjār Abul ʿAbbās Shihābud-Dīn Ibn Shaḥnah v 446
137 Shaykh Sirāj-ud-Dīn Ḥusayn ibn Mubārak Zabīdī Ḥanafī v 448
138 Shaykh ʿAbul Waqt ʿAbd-ul-Awwal Sijzī Harawī v 450
139 Shaykh ʿAbdur Raḥmān Al-Bawshanjī Ad-Dāwūdī v 452
140 Shaykh ʿAbdullāh ibn Aḥmed Sarakhsī v 454
141 Shaykh Muḥammad ibn Yūsuf Firabrī Shāfiʿī v 455
142 The Ḥanafī Narrators Found in Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī 457
143 The Birth and Death Dates of The Famous Aʿimmah and ʿUlamāʾ Kirām 471
144 The Birth and Death Years of the Famous ʿUlamāʾ of Deoband 480
145 Sources and References 484
146 A Brief Biography of the Compiler of This Book 488
XV
‫الرحيم‬
ِّ ‫الرحمن‬
ِّ ‫بسم هللا‬
DEDICATION
Dedicated to:
All of my noble teachers
Especially
Muḥaddith Kabīr Mawlānā Ḥabīb-ur-Raḥmān Aʿẓmī Amīr-ul-Hind
Shaykh-ul-Ḥadīth Ḥazrat Mawlānā ʿAbdul Laṭīf Nuʿmānī Aʿẓmī
My Honourable father, Shaykh-ul-Ḥadīth Ḥazrat Muftī Qārī Ḥafīẓ -ur-

Raḥmān Aʿẓmī
‫نور هللا مرقدهم‬

ِّ
May Allāh l enlighten their graves with light.
XVII
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS ENDORSEMENTS
Blessed Words and Marginalia
The Researcher and Muḥaddith of The Time
Ḥazrat Mawlānā Muḥammad ʿAbdur Rashīd Nuʿmānī, Karāchī 1 v
Saturday 13 Ṣafar, 1412 A.H.
Respected Mawlānā Fazlur Rahman Azmi ṣāḥib
.‫وفقني هللا واياكم لما يحب ويرضي‬
May Allāh l inspire you and I to that which He loves and is pleased
with.
.‫ الحمد هلل علي العافية‬.‫وعليكم السالم ورحمة هللا وبركاته‬
Your respected letter dated 21 Muḥarram, 1412 A.H. has been

received. I also received the muqaddamah (introduction) of Sunan
Tirmidhī and Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī. During those days, quarterly examinations
were taking place. Therefore, I personally reviewed both introductions.
You have mentioned and referenced all the sources used. I reviewed it
in haste. I highlighted those things which I found to be incorrect. I
reviewed the introduction of Sunan Tirmidhī in one sitting and
completed the introduction of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī in two sittings.
Whatever has been mentioned until now regarding the discussions of

the terms ḥasan, ṣaḥīḥ and gharīb in Tirmidhī, I do not understand
them as nothing more than the technical terminologies and definitions
explained by the teachers. Its true meaning can only be established
when all the chains of these narrations are collected and a decision is
made just as Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar v exerted his efforts regarding the chains
of Bukhārī. Otherwise, all other explanations are merely assumptions.
For this reason, there are many explanations and comments regarding
1 Birth: 18 Dhul Qaʿdah, 1333 A.H. Death: 29 Rabīʿuth Thānī, 1419 A.H. (See: “Al
Kalāmul Mufīd fī Taḥrīril Asānīd” pages 90-152)
1
this from many different scholars. Varying opinions can be found

regarding this discussion.
Whatever I have written, I have written it in the margins of the

introductions which you have sent and in the introduction of Ṣaḥīḥ
Bukhārī, I wrote it where there were blank spaces in the actual text...2
2 The entire letter is very beneficial. It is mentioned in the biography of

Mawlānā Fazlur Rahman ‫مد ظله‬
Most of the annotations have been included in both books. (ʿAtīq)
2
‫الرحيم‬
ِّ ‫الرحمن‬
ِّ ‫بسم هللا‬
ENDORSEMENT
Ḥazrat Mawlānā ʿAbdul Ḥaq Ṣāḥib Aʿẓmī v 1
Shaykh-ul-Ḥadīth of Dārul ʿUlūm Deoband, India
.‫ أما بعد‬،‫نحمده ونصلّى على رسوله الكريم‬
“Hadiyyatud Darārī for the students of the Ṣaḥīḥ of Imām Bukhārī” is a

book compiled by Ḥazrat Mawlānā Fazlur Rahman Azmi ṣāḥib, the
Shaykh-ul-Ḥadīth of Madrasah Arabia Islamia, Azaadville, South Africa.
This lowly one has also reviewed a few sections from it.
This praiseworthy scholar has written a thorough discussion on the

isnād (chains of narrations). Likewise, he has also written a
fundamental discussion on the tarājim abwab (chapter titles). There
are also other knowledgeable discussions which are lines of guidance
for both, teachers and students of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī. This book is equally
beneficial for students and the teachers. This book is a masterpiece of
Ḥazrat Mawlānā’s knowledge of Ḥadīth.
The aforementioned Mawlānā has also authored many other books,

which have gained much acceptance amongst the people of knowledge.
There is hope and faith in Allāh l that inshāʿAllāh this beautiful book
will also be received with acceptance.
1Birth: 17th December 1938 C.E. (Approximately 1347 A.H.). Death: 30th Rabīʿ-
ul-Awwal 1438 A.H. [30th December 2016 C.E.]. Age: 91 years. He taught Ṣaḥīḥ
Bukhārī for approximately sixty-five (65) years- sixteen (16 years) in Mutlaʿ
Al ʿAwm Bināras, fourteen (14) years in Mau and thirty-four (34) years in
Deoband. [See the monthly magazine of Dārul ʿUlūm Deoband Rabīʿ-ul-Awwal and Jumād-al-
Awwal 1438 A.H. edition for details.]
This foreword was written upon this humble servant’s request. He wrote it
very briefly due to the rush for it to be printed. He said: If there was no rush
for it to be printed, I would have written a more informative and impressive
one with more details. (May Allāh reward him in both the worlds.) (Atiqur
Rahman Azmi)
3
This lowly one also prays that Allāh l favours this book with
acceptance and keeps Ḥazrat Mawlānā in the best of health and
continually bless him with opportunities to be part of other
knowledgeable and religious services. Āmīn.
‫ض َّم الَيها أ ْلف آمينا‬

ُ َ ‫حت ِّى أ‬ ٍ‫آمين آمين َل أقو ُل ِبواحدة‬
Lowly and humble servant,

ʿAbdul Ḥaqq (May Allāh forgive him)
Servant of Dārul ʿUlūm Deoband
16h Rajab, 1418 A.H.
4
ENDORSEMENT
Ḥazrat Mawlānā Niʿmatullāh Ṣāḥib ‫دا مت بركاتهم‬
Teacher of Ḥadīth and Head of Takhaṣṣuṣ fil Ḥadīth Department
in Dārul ʿUlūm Deoband (Birth:1366 A.H.)
ٰ ‫الحمد ہلل‬
.‫ اما بعد‬.‫وکفی وسالم علی عباده الذين اصطفی‬
It is a common custom in the religious schools of India, Pakistan and

Bangladesh that at the time of commencing the teaching of a book on a
particular subject, the teacher defines the subject, it’s objective,
purpose and the importance and need of the subject.
Along with the above, he mentions the rank of the book which is being
taught amongst other books on this topic. Additionally, an introduction
of the author, the author’s rank in this subject and the history of the
compilation of the book are all briefly explained. However, when the
fitnah (corruption) of inkār ḥadīth (rejection and denial of Ḥadīth)
began in India then subsequently, while starting the books of Ḥadīth
and especially in the beginning of Bukhārī, it became a custom to
include these matters with details.
When Mawlānā Fazlur Rahman Azmi ṣāḥib Mawwi, went for the
purpose of teaching to the Azaadville Madrassa, South Africa, he was
given the responsibility to teach Bukhārī. So, he penned notes on those
topics which are customarily explained in the beginning of the year.
Thereafter, he combined them into a book so that benefit will be widely
gained from it.
The early scholars did such productive research regarding every

aspect of Ḥadīth that the generations thereafter could not add to it.
This is clear from the text of Shāmī:
5
‫ وعلم ال نضج وال احترق وهو علم البيان‬،‫علم نضج وال احترق وهو علم النّحو واألصول‬
[Shāmī 1/37].‫ وعلم نضج واحترق وهو علم الحديث‬،‫والت ّفسير‬
‫ لوگوں کی‬،‫اب بعد میں آنے والے کا بڑا کارنامہ یہی ہے کہ زمانہ کے حاالت‬
‫ضرورت اور طلبہ کی صالحیت و استعداد کی رعایت کرتے ہوۓ اس ناپیدار کنار‬
.‫سمندر سے طرح طرح موتیوں کو چن چن کر ایک لڑی میں پرودے‬
Now, it will be a great achievement for those coming afterwards,

according to the conditions of the time, the needs of the people and
according to the capacity of the students, to select different types of
pearls from this far and unseen corner of the ocean and string them
together onto one string.
Mawlānā’s firmness in knowledge and sincerity in ʿamal (practice) is

proven by his following statement:
‫ہم متقدمین کے خوشہ چیں اور کاسہ لیس ہیں اور کاسہ گدائی لے کر ان‬
.‫حضرات کے خوان علم و حقیق کے گرد گھوم رہے ہیں‬
“We are mere collectors of the research done by our predecessors.

With empty hands, we roam around the courts of knowledge and
research of these Hazrāt.”
Mawlānā has arranged the important points very skillfully in a very

orderly manner and has provided such information in this book, that
reading this book alone will make one independent from reading
others. Some discussions are such that it is difficult to find them in a
single book. For instance, the discussion regarding whether the aḥādīth
of Sahīh Bukhārī and Ṣahih Muslim are mufīd yaqīn (give the benefit of
conviction) or not? Under this heading, the proofs of both sides along
with the research of the great scholars of Deoband ‫ رحمهم هللا‬have been
gathered in such a way that the respect of both parties and books is
maintained in such a manner that the readers will be satisfied with the
research of the elders of Deoband and all doubts and suspicions will be
removed.
6
May Allāh l accept the book and make it beneficial for the people of
knowledge, and a means of provision for the hereafter for the author.
Āmīn.
Niʿmatullāh (May he be forgiven)

Servant of Dārul ʿUlūm Deoband
4th Rajab, 1416 A.H.
ENDORSEMENT
Shahīdul Islām
Muftī Nizāmuddīn Ṣāḥib Shāmizī v
Former Shaykhul Ḥadīth and Muft, Jāmiʿah Binori Town Karāchī

(Death: 10 Rabīʿ-uth-Thānī 1425 A.H./30 May 2002)
This humble servant, Muftī Nizāmuddīn Shāmizī has reviewed the

book, “Hadiyyatud Darārī: Introduction of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī”, compiled by
the outstanding and exceptional student of Mawlānā Ḥabībur Raḥmān
Aʿẓmī v, Ḥazrat Mawlānā Fazlur Rahman Azmi ṣāḥib.
Two years ago, this humble servant, travelled to South Africa. It was
during this journey that this humble servant met Ḥazrat Mawlānā in
Dārul ʿUlūm Azaadville, wherein Ḥazrat Mawlānā is the respected
Shaykh-ul-Ḥadīth and it was there this valuable gift was presented to
me.
7
This humble servant read some portions of the book during his travel
and some was read thereafter. The field of Ḥadīth, specifically the
introduction of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī and introductory topics of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī
are compiled in this book at much length, with great referenced
research.
At this time, the book is printed in Pakistan, and inshāʾAllāh the

teachers and students here will also benefit greatly from its extensively
researched topics.
At this time, this humble servant, due to his condition, is unable to

write in much detail. Nevertheless, it is my hope that inshāʾAllāh the
beauty of this book will attain the praise of and approval from the
people of knowledge themselves.
May Allāh l grant this book acceptance in His esteemed court.
May He make it a means of benefit for his creation and grant the author
success in this world and the hereafter.
May He grant those in Pakistan who made an effort in the printing

(publishing) of this book a great (generous) reward. Āmīn.
Nizāmuddīn
Teacher at Jāmiʿah ʿUlūm Islāmiyyah
ʿAllāmah Binori Town Karachi, Pakistan
8
9
ENDORSEMENT
Doctor ʿAlī Aṣghar Chishtī v
Head of the Daʿwah Academy and Teacher of Ḥadīth in Fayṣal University, Islamabad
:‫ أما بعد‬،‫نحمده ونصلّى على رسوله الكريم‬. ‫الرحمٰ ن ال ّرحيم‬

ّ ‫بسم هللا‬
Currently, from amongst the sources and references which are most
fundamental and reliable from within the field of the science of Ḥadīth,
the most authentic and reliable collected compilation is the Jāmiʿ Ṣaḥīḥ
of Imām Bukhārī v.
From the time of its compilation until today, millions of people have
benefitted greatly from this book. By the will of Allāh this book will
continue to be a means of ongoing benefit until the Day of Qiyāmah.
The teachers of aḥādīth in religious institutions, would firstly give a

detailed introduction of Imām Bukhārī v and his book to their students
during class. The objective of this introduction is to give some
guidelines which would make the students aware of such important
points which later, during the course of the lessons, would prove to be
of great benefit.
For a long time, our Respected and Honourable Mawlānā Fazlur Rhman
Azmi ṣāḥib is fulfilling the duty of being the Shaykh-ul- Ḥadīth in
Madrasah Arabia, Azaadville, South Africa.
His book on the introduction of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī which he has named,

“Hadiyyatud Darārī-Muqaddamah Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī”, is equally beneficial
for both students and teachers of aḥādīth, and it is filled with vast
amounts of information.
The topics covered are very interesting and informative. It is as though

Mawlānā Azmi has fully covered and studied the important sources of
Ḥadīth during its compilation. According to their subject matters, he
10
has drawn together comprehensive and valuable statements for the

students of Ḥadīth.
This humble one has studied this book and has found it very beneficial
in every aspect. The Shaykh-ul-Ḥadīth of Dārul ʿUlūm Deoband has
reviewed this book. I do not consider myself worthy of even writing
any type of foreword for such a book. It is on the request of Respected
Mawlānā Muftī Shamsuddīn ṣāḥib that I have penned these few lines. It
is Respected Muftī Ṣāḥib’s wish that this introduction also be published
in Pakistan so that the students and teachers of aḥādīth here may also
benefit tremendously from it. I pray to Allāh l, the Exalted, to bestow a
great reward on Shaykh-ul-Ḥadīth Ḥazrat Mawlānā Fazlur Rahman
Azmi ṣāḥib, who has compiled this book and may He grant his
knowledgeable and academic research vast acceptance.
ʿAlī Aṣghar Chishtī

Teacher of Ḥadīth
Fayṣal University
Islamabad
11
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS AUTHOR’S NOTE
AUTHOR’S NOTE
‫سالم على خير عباده‬ ّ ‫طاعات والصّلوة وال‬ّ ‫صل العباد علي ال‬
ّ ‫الحمد ہلل ال ّذي بنعمته وتوفيقه يتح‬
ٰ
‫وسيّد انبياءه ورسله محمد النّبيى األ ّم ّى وعلى آٰله وأصحابه وأزواجه وذ ّرياَّته وأتبا عه أجمعين‬
ٰ
.‫ أما بعد‬.
This book consists of important information regarding the life of Imām

Bukhārī v and his most famous book of its time, the most authentic
book after the Book of Allāh, “Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī” which was written for the
purpose of teaching students during dars (class). There is also mention
of other books written by Imām Bukhārī v. However, they are not part
of the subject-matter of this book. It is for this reason they have not
been discussed.
The primary source used is Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar Asqalānī’s v introduction of

“Fatḥul Bārī,” “Hadyus Sārī.” Other sources which were fully utilised
are “Muqaddamah Qasṭalānī” and Shaykh Muḥammad Zakariyyā’s v
introduction of “Lāmiʿ ad-Darārī.”
Much has been written regarding Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī. However, it is not the
objective of this book to combine and include all that has been written
in this regard. Conversely, the objective of this book is to mention the
fundamental and important concepts so that one can obtain the
knowledge concerning the author v and the specialties of his book.
This book does not consist of any newly discovered information. An

effort has been made to combine and compile the research which the
researchers have done thus far in a particular, organised manner.
An effort has also been made to quote the entire reference of what has
been mentioned. The Arabic text has not been included as almost all of
the references are from Arabic sources. Thus, if all the Arabic
references were quoted the book would have become double in size.
May Allāh l accept the author and all those who served in assisting
with this book.
12
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS AUTHOR’S NOTE
‫ کاسہ گدائی لے کر ان‬، ‫ہم ان متقدمین کے کوشہ چیں اور کاسہ لیس ہیں‬
‫ علم نبوت کا کچھ‬،‫حضرات کے خوان علم و تحقیق کے ارد گرد گھوم رہے ہیں‬
.‫حصہ نصیب ہو جاۓ توز ہے قسمت‬
We are merely those who collect and gather the research done by these
predecessors. With empty hands, we have roamed around the courts of
knowledge and research of these Ḥazrāt- great, dignified and
honourable personalities. How fortunate will we be if we were to
receive a small portion of the knowledge of prophethood! ‫وما ذلك علي هللا‬
‫بعزيز‬
Fazlur Rahman Azmi

Azaadville, South Africa
6th Shaʿbān 1411 A.H
21st February 1990
13
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS IMĀM BUKHĀRĪ: NAME, LINEAGE & FAMILY
The Life of Imām Muḥammad ibn Ismāʿīl Bukhārī v
Birth: 13th Shawwāl 194 A.H.
Death: Night of ʿĪd ul Fiṭr 256 A.H.
Age: 62 years
Name and Lineage
His full name is: Muḥammad ibn Ismāʿīl ibn Ibrāhīm ibn Al-Mughīrah
ibn Bardizbah.
‫) بفتح الباء الموحدة وسكون الراء المهمله وكسر الدال المهمله وسكون الزاء المعجمة وفتح الباء‬
(.‫الموحودة بعدها هاء‬
This pronunciation of ‫( بَر ِدزبَه‬Bar-diz-bah) is famous. There are also

other opinions regarding this word ‫( بردزبه‬Bardizbah).1 According to
the usage of the people of Bukhārā, the meaning of this word is farmer.
1Mawlānā Badr ʿĀlam Mīrthī v quotes from a Russian scholar in the footnotes
of “Tarjumān us Sunnah” (1/252) that it is pronounced as ‫( بَردَازبَه‬Bardāzbāh)
and it means well-mannered and experienced. (Fazl 12)
Note: Imām Bukhārī v differs slightly with the Aḥnāf. For this reason, he refers
to them with the words, ‘‫ ’بعض الناس‬and thereafter makes an objection. Juʿfī, the
title given to Imām Bukhārī v, is in accordance with the fiqh of Imām Abū
Ḥanīfah v. It is for this reason we mentioned: “This is Imām Abū Hanīfah’s v
opinion. According to him, the person upon whose hands Islām was accepted,
obtains the right of walāʾ.” (Fayḍul Bārī: 1/33) “Fayḍul Bārī” was compiled by
Ḥazrat Mawlānā Badr ʿĀlam Mīrthī v (later known as) Madnī and was written
in Dabhel. He also wrote a marginalia on “Fayḍul Bārī” called “Al-Badrus Sārī
ʿAlā Fayḍul Bārī”. He was present in the lessons of ʿAllāmah Kashmīrī v for
many years and also benefitted from the lectures of others. He compiled all of
this and prepared this book. This is a book students should have. One should
refer to “Lāmiʿ-ud-Darārī” and “Fayḍul Bārī” if one wishes to see a summary of
15
Bardizbah was a Persian and he was a fire worshipper like his people.
His son Mughīrah accepted Islam at the hands of Yamān Juʿfī, the ruler
of Bukhārā. Due to this connection of walāʾ (clientship), he was called
Mughīrah Juʿfī. Imām Bukhārī v is also called Juʿfī due to this same
reason. [‫]موَلهم الجعفي‬
This is Imām Abū Hanīfah’s v opinion. According to him, the person

upon whose hands Islām was accepted, obtains the right of walāʾ.2
(Fayḍul Bārī 1/32)
Mughīrah in Bukhārā
The great grandfather of Imām Bukhārī v, Mughīrah, came to Bukhārā

after becoming a Muslim. We did not find his son, Ibrāhīm, being
mentioned in the books. However, his son, i.e., Imām Bukhārī’s v father
Ismāʿīl, has been mentioned by Ibn Ḥibbān v in “Kitābuth Thiqāt”
under the fourth category of muḥaddithīn (scholars of aḥādīth). It is
written that he has narrated from Ḥammād ibn Zayd v and Imām Mālik
v and the people of ʿIrāq have narrated from him. (Hadyus Sārī pg. 477)
Imām Bukhārī v wrote in “Tārikh Kabīr” that his father3 heard from
Imām Mālik v and Ḥammād ibn Zayd v. His father also shook hands
with ʿAbdullāh ibn Mubārak v. (Hadyus Sārī introduction of Fatḥul Bārī pg. 477)
the research of the ʿulamāʾ of Deoband. (Students should also have “Fatḥul
Bārī” and “ʿUmdatul Qārī” from among the older commentaries.) [Extracted from
Ifādātush Shaykh]
2This is referred to as walāʾ mawālāt, i.e., when a person becomes a Muslim
on the hands of a person, this person contracts a treaty of clientage with the
revert that he will inherit from the revert when he dies and he will also pay on
his behalf when he commits an offence. (See: Al-Qudurī) [Translator]
3From this it becomes known that Imām Bukhārī v was introduced to
knowledge through his father. No mention is made of those before him in any
of the books. They were not muḥaddithīn nor were they scholars. Imām
Bukhārī v is a non-Arab. He is originally from Persia. However, he is the
substantiation of this Ḥadīth:
16
In some manuscripts, instead of ‫صافَ َح‬

َ (shook hands), ‫ب‬ َ ِ‫صح‬
َ (in the
company of) is written. (See pg. 478 in Hadyus Sārī published by Yūsufī in
Deoband)
The words of Imām Bukhārī v in “Tārikh Kabīr” (pg. 306-Hyderabad India)

are:
“.‫” رآى ح ِّماد َ بنَ زيد صافح ابن المبارك بِكِلتا يدَيه وسمِ ع مالكًا‬
The apparent meaning of which is that Ismāʿīl saw Ḥammād ibn Zayd
greeting Ibn Mubārak with both of his hands and he heard aḥādīth
from Imām Mālik v. It is not that Ismāʿīl greeted Ibn Mubārak4.
.‫س‬ ِ َ‫اإلي َما ُن بِالث ُّ َريَّا لَنَاَلَهُ ِر َجال م ِْن أَ ْبنَاءِ ف‬

َ ‫ار‬ ِ َ‫لَ ْو كَا َن علم بِالث ُّ َريَّا او لَ ْو كَان‬
“If knowledge was on the Pleiades (star), or if faith was on the Pleiades, men
from the sons of Persia would have attained it.” [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
4Similar to the muḥaddithīn, we also shake hands with both of our hands.
However, you will come across some people who refer to themselves as Ahl al-
Ḥadīth (people of Ḥadīth), but they only shake with one hand. They are known
by the title Ahl al-Ḥadīth, whereas we are the ones who act (on the Ḥadīth),
and they simply hold the title. Imām Bukhārī v mentioned the chapter: ‫باب‬
‫“ المصافحة باليدين‬Chapter Regarding Shaking With Both Hands” in the second
volume of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī. In this chapter, he mentions the Ḥadīth of Ibn
Masʿūd z when he was taught the tashāhhud. However, those who consider
themselves as the Ahl al-Ḥadīth take the names of Imām Bukhārī v and Imām
Muslim v very often, but when it comes to this matter, they will not shake
with both hands. We will say to them: ‘You have shook hands with Imām
Bukhārī v with one hand only, not with both hands. Meaning you have taken
Imām Bukhārī’s v name for one or two masāʾil (rulings), but you do not follow
him in every masʿalah. Their habit is to shake with one hand, i.e., joining one
hand and leaving the other hand loose (half partridge, half quail). Regarding
this subject, our teacher's teacher Ḥazrat Mawlānā ʿAbdul Ghaffār ṣāḥib
Naqshbandī, a great student of Ḥazrat Ghangohī wrote a booklet titled:
“Targhībul Mutalāqiyīn bil Muṣāfaḥati bil Yadayn.” A summary of it is found in
“Maqālāt-e- Aʿẓmī”. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
17
However, Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar v mentioned in his book “ Tahdhīb-ut-

Tahdhīb” in accordance with “Tārikh Kabīr” (Imām Bukhārī’s v book)
that Ismāʿīl narrated from Ḥammād ibn Zayd v and Ibn Mubārak v.
‫صافَ َح ابن المبارك بكلتا يديه‬

َ ‫ ورآى ح ِّماد بن زيد‬-Meaning, he saw Ḥammād ibn
Zayd greeting Ibn Mubārak.
He further writes: “. ‫ رأيت ح ِّماد بن زيد وجاءه ابن المبارك بمكة فصافحه بكلتا‬:‫قال ابي‬
‫“– ”يديه‬My father said: ‘I saw Ḥammād ibn Zayd greeting Ibn Mubārak
with both hands when he came to him in Makkah.’”5 (See pg. 274-275 in
Tahdhīb-ut-Tahdhīb)
In the muqaddamah (introduction) of “Lāmiʿ”, after Ḥazrat Shaykh

Zakariyyā v mentioned the differences in Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar’s v texts, he
has written that perhaps this (difference in texts) maybe because of
the differences present in the nuskhahs (copies). (Muqaddamah Lāmiʿ pg. 4)
At this instance, in the introduction of “Anwārul Bārī” there seems to

be a deficiency in the translation.6 (And Allāh l knows best.)
Imām Bukhārī v mentioned Ḥammād ibn Zayd greeting Ibn Mubārak in

vol. 2 on pg. 926 in Kitābul Istiʿdhān (The Chapter Regarding Seeking
Permission) in the sub-chapter of ‫( باب اَلخذ باليدين‬Chapter Regarding
Holding Both Hands) after the chapter of ‫( باب المصافحہ‬Chapter
Regarding Shaking Hands). It has also been mentioned in his book
“Tārīkh” under the biography of ʿAbdullāh ibn Maslamah Murādī v
with a continuous chain. [As Ḥāfiẓ has mentioned in his “Tahdhīb”.]
5 You may have noticed that the two discussions are contradictory. In “Hadyus
Sārī”, that which Ḥāfiẓ v has written by referencing Imām Bukhārī’s v “Tārīkh”
is mentioning something other than that which is written in “Tahdhīb-ut-
Tahdhīb”. The apparent of which is that Ismāʿīl saw Ḥammād ibn Zayd
greeting Ibn Mubārak with both his hands and he also heard the Ḥadīth from
Imām Mālik v. It does not mean that Ismāʿīl greeted Ibn Mubārak as is
understood from “Hadyus Sārī”. After reviewing these books, this discrepancy
was found. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
18
The same ʿAbdullāh ibn Mubārak v who met or saw Imām Bukhārī’s v
pious father is from amongst the students of Imām Aʿẓam, Imām Abū
Ḥanīfah v. However, it is surprising that Ḥāfiẓ v did not include him
among the students of Imām Ṣāḥib v7 in “Tahdhīb-ut-Tahdhīb”8, whilst
the author of “Tahdhīb-ul-Kamāl” (Ḥāfiẓ Mizzī v) mentioned his name
among the students of Imām Ṣāḥib v. Shaykh Muḥammad Zakariyyā v
complained about this. (See Muqaddamah Lāmiʿ pg. 4)
7 Our Mawlānā Aʿẓmī v wrote a sentence regarding ʿAbdullāh ibn Mubārak v

which is worthy of being written in gold: “Ibn Mubārak is a person who has
made Islām proud.” Meaning, “he is such a personality that Islām boasts. There
is an ʿAbdullāh ibn Mubārak among my sons.” His life is an example worthy of
following. He was also a mujāhid. The poem he wrote to Fuḍayl ibn ʿAyāḍ v is
very famous. He was also a very famous muḥaddith who was accepted by all
and also a jurist. Imām Tirmidhī v has mentioned his opinions. Our Mawlānā
Aʿẓmī v has edited one of his books: “Kitābuz Zuhd War Raqāʾiq”. It was
translated by one of our other teachers, Mawlānā ʿAbdul Jabbār Aʿẓmī Mawwī
v. It is named “Īthārul Ākhirah”. It is a very unique book. Our Mawlānā Aʿẓmī v
also wrote an introduction for it. Similarly, one of ʿAbdullāh ibn Mubārak’s v
other books is also published. (A researcher from Baghdad published it.) It is
titled, “Al-Masnad Li ʿAbdullāh ibn Mubārak”. This researcher mentions his
sanad (chain of transmission) through Mawlānā Aʿẓmī v. He says: “I have
ijāzah (authorisation) for this book from Mawlānā Ḥabībur Raḥmān Aʿẓmī v.”
[Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
8
“Tahdhīb-ut-Tahdhīb” of Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar v is an abridged version of
“Tahdhīb-ul- Kamāl” of Ḥāfiẓ Mizzī v. However, Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar v has omitted
all that which is beneficial for the Aḥnāf. This is Ḥāfiẓ, “‫اَلمان والحفيظ‬.” This is the
complaint of ʿAllāmah Kashmīrī v. This is his exact words. Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar v
does not wish to be of any benefit to the Aḥnāf. He does not lie, rather he
removes their names so that people do not become aware. He does this
because Ibn Mubārak v is such a famous personality that if it became known
that he was the student of Imām Abū Ḥanīfah v, it would be like the saying, ‘A
tree is known from its fruit’. This is an important point for the Aḥnāf. [Extracted
from Ifādātush Shaykh]
19
However, according to the narration with the wording ‫ب‬

َ ِ‫صح‬
َ (staying in
company of), Imām Bukhārī’s v father would be the student of the
student of Imām Aʿẓam, Abū Ḥanīfah v.
Qasṭalānī v has written in the muqaddamah: “Dhahabī v9 said in

“Tārikh Islām” that Bukhārī’s father was amongst the pious scholars.
Aḥmad ibn Jaʿfar and Naṣr ibn Ḥusayn narrates from Abū Muʿāwiyah
and another group that Aḥmad ibn Ḥafṣ v (Abū Ḥafṣ Kabīr, the student
of Imām Abū Yūsuf v and Imām Muḥammad v) said: “I came to Abūl
Ḥasan Ismāʿīl ibn Ibrāhīm (the father of Imām Bukhārī v) at the time of
his death and he said: “I do not know of a single dirham in all my
wealth that is doubtful.”10 Aḥmad v said, “At that time I felt low of
myself.” (Muqaddamah Qasṭalānī pg. 36)
In “Fatḥul-Bārī”, Aḥyad 11 is printed instead of Aḥmad. It is the same in

two prints (pg. 479).
9 ʿAllāmah Shams-ud-Dīn Dhahabī v was from Damascus. The following is

mentioned regarding him in “Sharḥ Nukhbah”: “.‫” من أهل اَلستقراء التام‬- “He is
from among the thorough researchers.” The most experienced person in the
field of rijāl (grading narrators), the author of “Mizānul Iʿtidāl”. It is mentioned
in the taqrīr (discourse) of ʿAllāmah Kashmīrī v that he is so experienced in
grading narrators that if he was made to stand on a hill and all the narrators of
Ḥadīth were placed in the valley, and he is asked regarding the identity of each
one of them, he would begin to give the complete details of each one; their
names, villages, parents, date of birth and death and whether he is reliable or
weak. Few of his books have been mentioned previously; “Mizānul Iʿtidāl”,
“Tārīkh Islām”, “Al-ʿIbr” and “Siyar Aʿlāmin Nubalāʿ.” [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
10His father’s wealth was totally ḥalāl (lawful) and he spent it on his son’s
education. Allāh l blessed his knowledge so greatly that he wrote a book
which is known as ‫( اصح الكتاب بعد كتاب هللا‬the most authentic book after the Book
of Allāh). His mother’s story will also be mentioned. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
11Is Aḥyad even a name? This is a grave taḥrīf (alteration). This is deliberately
done so that no one would find out who Aḥmad ibn Ḥafṣ v is and so that the
20
Aḥmad Ibn Ḥafṣ refers to Abū Ḥafṣ Kabīr v who is a great Ḥanafī jurist.
He was the student of Ṣāḥibayn ‫رحمهما هللا‬. He was a resident of Bukhārā.
This incident shows that there was a connection between Abū Ḥafṣ
Kabīr v and Imām Bukhārī’s v father.12
connection between Imām Bukhārī v and the Aḥnāf does not become
apparent. This is great academic dishonesty. This is something which
attention must be paid to. Our Mawlānā Aʿẓmī v says: “This taḥrīf is also
present in “Musnad Aḥmad”.”
Once, instead of Abū Ḥanīfah, Abū Jayfah was written. This is academic
dishonesty. The Ḥanafīs are being oppressed. From the very beginning, Imām
Abū Ḥanīfah v was oppressed. However, Allāh’s l help is with the oppressed.
It is for this reason our mashāyihk say: “Become oppressed and live your life;
do not live your life by becoming oppressors.” Allāh’s l help is with the
oppressed. It is for this reason, the Ḥanafī madh-hab has gained acceptance.
Both this madh-hab and its founder are oppressed. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
It is written like this in two copies: The famous copy which is published
nowadays from Saudi Arabia with Ibn Bāz’s ḥāshiyah (annotations). The
second copy is the one published by Maktabah Yūsūfī. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
12 Mawlānā Muḥammad ʿAbdul Rashīd Nuʿmānī v has written that this
relationship continued in both families even after the death of Ismāʿīl.
Therefore, Imām Bukhārī v and Abū Ḥafṣ Kabīr’s v son, Imām Abū Ḥafṣ Ṣaghīr
v, were companions in the study of Ḥadīth and they travelled together. Abū
Ḥafṣ Kabīr v had sent so much merchandise to Imām Bukhārī v that some
traders bought it from him for a profit of five thousand (5000) rupees and
some traders were willing to give double the profit, but Imām Bukhārī v did
not want to change his intention. (Muqaddamah Fatḥul Bārī pg. 480)
Imām Bukhārī v had also studied from Abū Ḥafṣ Kabīr v. Khaṭīb Baghdādī v
mentioned this incident with his sanad. Muḥammad ibn Ismāʿīl ibn Ibrāhīm
ibn Mughayrah Juʿfī (Imām Bukhārī v) narrated that I was by Abū Ḥafṣ
(Kabīr) and I was listening to the Jāmiʿ of Sufyān from my father’s book. He
passed a letter that was not in my book. I mentioned it to him. He said the
same thing again. I mentioned it again to him and he said the same thing again.
I mentioned it to him for the third time, so he remained quiet for a little while.
Then he asked: “Who is this?” The people said: “That this is the son of Ismāʾīl
21
ibn Ibrāhīm ibn Bardizbah.” He said: “He has spoken the truth. Remember this
boy will one day be a man who will be a specialist in this field.” (Tārīkh Baghdādī
pg. 11 Published in Egypt 1349 A.H.)
In “Hadyus Sārī”’, Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Hajar v has also included Abū Ḥafṣ Kabīr v
amongst Imām Bukhārī’s v teachers and has narrated the following statement
of Abū Ḥafṣ Kabīr regarding Imām Bukhārī v: “‫“ – ”هذا يكون له صيت‬He will
become famous.” (Hadyus Sārī pg. 482)
Abū Ḥafṣ Kabīr v passed away in 217 A.H. He was of the same age as Imām
Shāfiʿī v and lived for a very long period after him. Some incidents regarding
his abstinence and worship are mentioned in Imām Zandostī’s “Rawḍatul
ʿUlamāʾ”.
Abū Ḥafṣ Kabīr v is from amongst Imām Muḥammad’s v senior students and
the prominence of the Aḥnāf scholars of Bukhārā ended with him. (Dhahabī
mentions this in Siyar Aʿlāmin Nubalāʾ)
Samʿānī has written that countless people have narrated from him. (Ibn Mājah
aur ʿIlm Ḥadīth pg.185 and pg. 186)
From the above incidents, it is evident that Abū Ḥafṣ Kabīr is from amongst
the famous and leading scholars of fiqh (jurisprudence) and Ḥadīth.
Additionally, it is also evident that Imām Bukhārī v had a connection to this
family from his father’s time. From this, it can be deduced that in the
beginning, Imām Bukhārī v did not have any differences with the Aḥnāf to the
extent that he was a student of a Ḥanafī. Perhaps, he gained the knowledge
and understanding of Ḥanafī fiqh during this time. However, he later had
differences with the Aḥnāf due to the changing of circumstances and his
connections with people of a different mind-set. Some other reasons regarding
this will be discussed later. (See Muqaddamah Iʿlāʾ-us-Sunan pg. 234 with taʿlīq by Shaykh
ʿAbdul Fatāḥ Abū Ghuddah)
In December 2019, we visited the graves of Abū Ḥafṣ Kabīr v and his son, Abū
Ḥafṣ Ṣaghīr v in Bukhārā. They are located in the heights. The graves of two
other Buzrugs (righteous personalities) are also present here. Fazlur Rahman.
22
23
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS BIRTH & EARLY LIFE
Birth and Early Life
Birth
There is a consensus amongst the scholars that Imām Bukhārī v was

born on 13th Shawwāl, 194 A.H. after Jumuʿah Ṣalāḥ in Bukhārā.
(Muqaddamatun Nawawī Sharḥ Bukhārī 1 pg. 23 and Hadyus Sārī pg. 477)
His father died during his childhood. Therefore, he was raised under
his mother’s care.2(Hadyus Sārī pg. 477)
Karāmah (Miracles)
In his childhood, Imām Bukhārī v became blind. His mother

continuously supplicated to Allāh (duʿāʾ). Once, she saw Ibrāhīm p in a
dream saying, “O woman! Due to your abundance of duʿāʾ, Allāh l has
1 This is taken from the book, “Hājatul Qārī”. Imām Nawawī v also started
writing a sharḥ (commentary) of Bukhārī Sharīf. He wrote an introduction.
However, this book of Imām Nawawī v was not completed. The introduction
which he wrote for the commentary of Bukhārī is titled “Hājatul Qārī” and
everyone is not able to obtain a copy this book. Only a few fortunate ones have
obtained a copy of it. Alḥamdulillāh, we are from amongst these fortunate
persons. Sometimes, when referring to this book, I will write “Hājatul Qārī”
and sometimes I will write “Muqaddamatun Nawawī lisharḥil Bukhārī”. It is
very difficult to obtain a copy of this introduction Only a few special persons
have obtained it. It is the oldest biography of Imām Bukhārī v. For this reason,
it is referenced first. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
2Imām Bukhārī v was an orphan. Many great scholars were orphans. They
were raised with the support of the Greatest Being. Thus, they became the
greatest scholars of their times. This is a very interesting point in history.
24
returned your son’s eyesight.” In the morning, his eyesight had actually
returned.3 (Hadyus Sārī pg. 478)
Seeking Knowledge
ʿAllāmah Dhahabī v has mentioned that Bukhārī v began studying and

listening to Ḥadīth from 205 A.H. He memorised the books of Ibn
Mubarāk v in his childhood. (Tadhkiratul Ḥuffāẓ 4 2/555) At that time, he was
ten years old.
Imām Bukhārī v said: “I thought of memorising Ḥadīth from the time I

was in maktab.” Warrāq Bukhārī (The scribe of Imām Bukhārī),
Muḥammad ibn Abī Ḥatim v5 asked: “How old were you at that time?”
He replied: “Ten years or even less. Then, on leaving maktab, I began
3 Imām Bukhārī v became blind. He was not born blind. If a mother

supplicates abundantly for her child, such karāmāt will also be manifested.
The father should pay special attention to the wealth he earns. His wealth
should not come from doubtful or ḥarām (unlawful) sources. The mother
should pay special attention to supplicating for her child. [If the mother and
father pay close attention to these things] then their child will become like
Imām Bukhārī v. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
4 “Tadhkiratul Ḥuffāẓ”: This is Dhahabī’s v famous book regarding the ḥuffāẓ

of Ḥadīth. In this book, all the ḥuffāẓ of Ḥadīth are mentioned. In “Mīzānul
ʿItidāl” the mukhtalaf fīhī narrators are mentioned. However, in “Tadhkiratul
Ḥuffāẓ”, all the ḥuffāẓ are mentioned. It is a very great book. Imām Abū
Ḥanīfah and Ṣāḥibayn ‫ رحمة هللا عليهم‬are also mentioned. Then, Imām Dhahabī v
also mentioned him separately in “Tadhkiratul Ḥuffāẓ”. Dhahabī v did not
mention him in “Mīzānul ʿItidāl”. His opponents are the ones who later added
it. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
5Muḥammad ibn Abī Ḥātim: This is the kātib (scribe) of Imām Bukhārī v. In
the past, the muḥaddithīn always had scribes with them who kept a pen and
paper. Whatever the muḥaddithīn used to say, they would record it. [Extracted
25
attending the gatherings of muḥaddith Dākhilī v6 and others. One day

he was mentioning a sanad (chain of transmission) in the following
manner: Sufyān ibn Abī Zubayr from Ibrāhīm. I said: “Abū Zubayr did
not narrate from Ibrāhīm.” So, he scolded me. I said: “If you have the
original book with you, check it.” He went and checked. He then came
back out and asked: “How is it then, o son?” I said that it is Zubayr Ibn
ʿAdī, who narrates from Ibrāhīm. After this, he took his pen and
corrected it in his book. Then he said: “You have spoken the truth.”
Someone asked Imām Bukhārī v, “How old were you at that time?” He
said: “Eleven years.””
He said: “I had already memorised the books of Ibn Mubārak and Wakīʿ
by the age of sixteen. I also knew the statements of the Aṣḥābur- Rāʾy.
After this, I went on a journey for ḥajj with my mother and brother.”
(Hadyus Sārī pg. 478)
At this age, before commencing the ḥajj journey, I most probably heard
the “Jāmiʿ” of Sufyān 7 Thawrī from Abū Ḥafṣ Kabīr v as has been stated
6 I could not find any information regarding muḥaddith Dākhlī. (Fazl)

7 In one era, the Jāmiʿ of Sufyān Thawrī v (death: 161 A.H.) was widely used
and accepted. In the biographies of Imām Bukhārī v there is no mention of
Muwaṭṭāʾ Mālik, however there is mention of the Jāmiʿ of Sufyān. Imām Abū
Dawūd v has graded it better than all other books as is clarified and explained
in his letter regarding Sunan Abū Dawūd which he wrote to the people of
Makkah. {This letter has been published with the taḥqīq (research) of
ʿAllāmah Kawtharī v, and Sahykh ʿAbdul Fatāḥ Abū Ghuddah v. He sent a
letter to the people of Makkah. He wrote a few points regarding his sunan in
this letter.}
When the Jāmiʿ of Sufyān was presented to Imām Zufar v (death: 158 A.H.) in
Baṣrah, he said: “These are our own words which are being narrated from
others.” (Jawāhirul Muḍīyyah pg. 535) {It becomes known that there are many views
of the Ḥanafīs mentioned in Sufyān’s Jāmiʿ. The reason for this is:} Sufyān
Thawrī v was a resident of Kūfah. In many rulings, his opinion has coincided
with that of Imām Abū Ḥanīfah v as is apparent from Tirmidhī. {In his Sunan,
Imām Tirmidhī v usually mentions at the end of the chapter as follows: “This
26
by Khaṭīb Baghdādī (2/11). From the aforementioned narrations, it is

clear that as long as he remained in Bukhārā he maintained a good
is the opinion of Thawrī and some of the Ahl Kūfah and most of the times, this
is precisely what he means.”} Imām Abū Yūsuf v said: “Sufyān Thawrī is more
of a follower of Imām Abū Ḥanīfah than myself.” (Al Intiqāʾ by Ibn ʿAbdil Bar pg. 128)
{Ibn ʿAbdil Bar Mālikī v mentions this in his book, “Al-Intiqāʾ”. We have
mentioned this statement and have also translated it in Urdu. Mawlānā
ʿAbdullāh Tāʾwlī translated the entire book. The biographies of three Imāms
are mentioned in this book. The full name of the book is: “Al- Intiqāʾ fi Faḍāʾil
Thulāthatil Fuqahāʾ Imām Abū Ḥanīfah, Imām Mālik aur Imām Shāfiʿī”}.
Even though Sufyān Thawrī v used to attend the gatherings of Imām Abū
Ḥanīfah v and narrated Ḥadīth from him, he studied Imām Abū Ḥanīfah’s fiqh
from ʿAlī ibn Mus-hir who was a special student of Imām Abū Ḥanīfah v.
{From this it becomes known that Sufyān Thawrī’s fiqh is also indebted to the
Ḥanafīs. Meaning, the fiqh of the Ḥanafīs is a great favour and blessing for
Sufyān Thawrī’s fiqh. If the fiqh of Abū Ḥanīfah v was non-existent, the fiqh of
Sufyān Thawrī v would also be non-existent.} Additionally, he is considered
reliable by the consensus of all the muḥaddithīn. Yazīd ibn Harūn (death: 206
A.H.) stated that Sufyān Thawrī v studied the fiqh of Imām Abū Ḥanīfah v
from ʿAlī ibn Mus-hir and from his assistance and encouragement, he authored
this book which was titled, “Al-Jāmiʿ”. (Ibn Mājah aur ʿIlm Ḥadīth pg. 184). Fazl
It becomes known that Sufyān’s Jāmiʿ is also indebted to the Ḥanafīs. We have
translated ʿAllāmah Kawtharī’s v “BulūghulʾAmānī fi sīratil Imām Muḥammad
ibn Al-Ḥasan Al-Shaybānī”. In this book, ʿAllāmah Kawtharī has written in
details regarding how the Mālikī fiqh has been derived from the Ḥanafī fiqh.
The fiqh of Sufyān Thawrī v and Mālik v is indebted to Ḥanafī fiqh. The
following statement of Imām Shāfiʿī v is very famous: ‫ الناس عيال علي فقه ابي حنيفة‬-
“The people are all dependent on the fiqh of Abū Ḥanīfah”
Imām Shāfiʿī v has also said: ‫“ من أراد أن يتبحر فهو عيال علي ابي حنيفة‬Whosoever
wishes to become an expert in fiqh, he is in need of and indebted to Imām Abū
Ḥanīfah v.” Imām Shāfiʿī’s student, Ḥarmalah has narrated this from Imām
Shāfiʿī v: ‫الفضل ما شهدت به األعداء‬- “Virtue is that which one’s opponents testify
to.” Thus, Imām Abū Ḥanīfah v did not become Imām Aʿẓam just like that.
27
connection with the Aṣḥābur- Rāʾi and he was also well versed with
their views and opinions.8
Travels for Knowledge
From the above narration, Ḥāfiẓ Ṣāḥib v deduced that Imām Bukhārī’s
v first journey began in the year 210 A.H. when he was sixteen years
old. (Accordingly, Dhahabī v declared this in “Tadhkiratul Ḥuffāẓ”.)
Ḥāfiẓ v mentioned that if he began travelling earlier, he would have
met the mashāyikh (scholars) of higher categories whom he did not
meet but his contemporaries met.
Imām Bukhārī v was present in the time of muḥaddith ʿAbdur Razzāq.9

He also intended to go by him, and it was also possible to meet him.
However, he was informed that he passed away. Thus, Imām Bukhārī v
8“Aṣḥābur- Rāʾy” refers to the Aḥnāf. Initially, this was used as a form of
praise. They are the people of opinions these with deep insight of knowledge.
However, it later became a form of swearing. For instance, the word mullah in
India referred to a higher level of education. It referred to a degree one
obtained after studying the ʿĀlim course. However, this word is now being
used in an abusive manner although it is a very high degree of education and
there is a state examination to set in order to acquire it. [Extracted from Ifādātush
Shaykh]
9Muḥaddith ʿAbdur Razzāq is also known as Ṣanʿānī. He was mentioned

previously under the Ṭabaqāt and it was also mentioned that this book could
not be found. Our teacher, the Muḥaddith Mawlānā Ḥabībur Raḥmān Aʿẓmī v
did research on this book, edited it and published it. He was from Ṣanʿā which
is the capital of Yemen. He is the teacher of Bukhārī’s teacher. He is the author
of the 11-volume “Muṣannaf ʿAbdur Razzāq”. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
28
did not go by him in Yemen. Imām Bukhārī v indirectly narrated from

him. (Hadyus Sārī pg. 478 onwards)
Ḥajj Journey
Imām Bukhārī v travelled for ḥajj with his mother and elder brother in
the year 210 A.H.10After completing the ḥajj, his brother returned to
Bukhārā and passed away there. Imām Bukhārī v stayed in Makkah
Mukarramah to acquire knowledge. (Hadyus Sārī pg. 478)
There is nothing mentioned in the books regarding Imām Bukhārī’s v

mother. It is highly likely that she also returned with Imām Bukhārī’s v
brother to Bukhārā. Additionally, Imām Bukhārī v most probably
returned to Bukhārā when he acquired and studied aḥādīth from the
mashāyikh of all these cities.
Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar v narrated the statement of Imām Bukhārī v from Sahal
ibn Sarī: “I went twice to Syria, Egypt and Algeria and I went to Baṣrah
four times. I stayed in Ḥijāz for six years and I am unable to count the
number of times I visited Kūfah and Baghdad with the muḥaddithīn.”11
(Ibid)
10This is correct that he travelled with his mother and elder brother. In some
books there is mention of him travelling with his father and sister. However,
this is an error from the author or his scribe.
11From this, it is evident that Baghdād and Kūfah, i.e., ʿIrāq were the greatest
centres of knowledge. In Kūfah, every room was like a Dārul ʿUlūm.
In the biography of Imām Abū Yūsuf v, the following incident is mentioned.

Once, a man from Ḥijāz taunted Imām Abū Yūsuf v and said to him: “What do
you all who live in Kūfah know about knowledge? Knowledge is from Ḥijāz.
Knowledge was revealed by us. It was there that revelation came.” Imām Abū
Yūsuf v replied: “The wahī flowed from Ḥijāz and reached us. When it rains,
water does not gather and remain in that place. Rather, it flows and collects in
a place further away from the place in which it rained. Yes, the rain fell in
Ḥijāz but it has flowed and reached us.” After the era of Imām Mālik v,
29
He once said: “After completing ḥajj, I stayed in Madīnah Munawwarah

for one year where I continued writing Ḥadīth and I stayed in Baṣrah
for five years. I had my books with me, and I continued writing and
compiling books as well as performing ḥajj and I would come and go to
Baṣrah from Makkah Mukarramah. I have hope that Allāh l will
shower His blessings on my books.” (Hadyus Sārī pg. 228)
Sometimes he would listen to aḥādīth in Baṣrah and write in Syria.

Sometimes he would listen in Syria and go to Egypt and write it there.
(Hadyus Sārī pg. 487) Ḥākim v has mentioned the names of the mashāyikh
of the following cities in the “Tārīkh of Nayshapūr”: Makkah
Mukarramah, Madīnah Munawwarah, Syria, Bukhārā, Marw, Balkh,
Herāt, Ray, Nayshapūr, Baghdād, Wāsiṭ, Kūfah, Egypt, Jazīrah. It is
written that he went to these cities and stayed with their mashāyikh.
(Muqadaamatun Nawawī li Sharḥ Al-Bukhārī pg. 34 to 36. This book is published
under the title, “Ḥājat-ul-Qārī”.)
Imām Dhahabī v has mentioned that he heard from the mashāyikh of

the following cities: Balkh, Baghdād, Makkah, Baṣrah, Kūfah, Syria,
Asqalān, Ḥimṣ. (Tadhkiratul Ḥuffāẓ 2/555)
Khaṭīb Baghdādī v said: “Bukhārī went to the muḥaddithīn of the

following cities: Khurāsān, Jibāl, and all the cities of ʿIrāq. He then
wrote in Ḥijāz in Syria and Egypt. He went to Baghdād several times.”
(Muqaddamatun Nawawī of Shar Al-Bukhārī pg. 36)
Ibn Kathīr v said: “He went to Baghdād eight times and each time he
met Imām Aḥmad v,, he would urge him to stay in Baghdād and
rebuke him for staying in Khurāsān.” (Muqaddamah Qasṭālanī pg. 43)
Madīnah Munawwarah no longer remained a centre of knowledge. Rather,

ʿIrāq became the centre of knowledge. The people would travel to ʿIrāq,
Baṣrah, Kūfah etc. to acquire knowledge. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
30
Imām Bukhārī v said: “I was present in the company of Ḥumaydī at the

age of eighteen (18).12 That is, at the beginning of the year of ḥajj.
There was a difference between him and another person. On seeing
me, he said: ‘The person to judge between us has arrived.’ Thereafter,
they both presented their case to me and I made a decision in favour of
Ḥumaydī because his stance was correct.’” (Hadyus Sārī pg. 483)
Imām Bukhārī v spent majority of his wealth in seeking knowledge. He

inherited abundant wealth from his father and he invested his wealth
by doing muḍārabah (profit-sharing partnership). Imām Bukhārī v
said: “I would earn five hundred (500) dirhams every month and I
would spend it to seek knowledge.” That reward which is by Allāh l is
the best and it is everlasting. (Hadyus Sārī pg. 479,480)
He said: “When I reached by Ādam ibn Abī Iyās (in Asqalān), there was
a delay in receiving my income to such an extent that I started eating
grass. When it was the third day of being in such a situation a man who
I did not know came to me and gave me a bag of dinārs.” (Hadyus Sārī pg.
480)
In this way Allāh’s l unseen help came to me.
ِ ‫َو َمن يَت َو َّكل علي‬

.‫هللا فَ ُه َو َحسبُه‬
12Imām Bukhārī began to oppose the Aḥnāf by staying in his (Ḥumaydī’s)

company. See page 97 for further details. This is the Ḥumaydī who is
mentioned in the first Ḥadīth of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī; ʿAbdullāh ibn Zubayr Al-
Ḥumaydī. He is either ascribed to his tribe or to his forefather Ḥumayd. He
was very harsh against the Ḥanafīs. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
31
Allāh l is sufficient for the one who relies on Him.13
13 We were searching the biographies of Imām Bukhārī v and the other

muḥaddithīn and also the biography of the author of “Hidāyah” to find out
who their shuyūkh of taṣawwuf (spiritual guides) were. However, we did not
find any information in this regard although all of them were the greatest
ascetics, most righteous and God-fearing scholars. Many of the teachers of the
author of “Hidāyah” had the title “Zāhid Al-Khaṭīb”. At that time, the
knowledge of taṣawwuf had not yet become a separate field. However, these
scholars were spiritually rectified and reformed by remaining in the blessed
company of their teachers. We specifically searched for this (the spiritual
guides of these scholars), but were unable to find anything in the biographies
of Imām Bukhārī v, Tirmidhī v, Muslim v, Abū Dāwūd v, Nasāʾī v etc. Whereas
they were of the highest level of righteousness. These scholars were rectified
and purified by remaining occupied in seeking knowledge and Ḥadīth, being
consistent in their daily acts of worship and remaining in the blessed
companionship of their teachers. The knowledge of the Qurʾān and Sunnah is
such that if a person seeks this knowledge with the correct intentions, this
knowledge alone will take him to Allāh l.
. ِ‫س ِك ْينَ ٍة َو َحيَاء‬ ِ ‫طلَبِ ْال َح ِد ْي‬

َ ‫ث بِ ِعفَ ٍة َوت ََوقُّ ٍر َو‬ َ ‫ي‬
ْ ِ‫يَ ْسعَ ْونَ ف‬
“They are those who are striving in the pursuit of Ḥadīth with chastity, dignity,
tranquility and modesty.”
These are very great qualities. They were attributed with these qualities from
the time they were studying Ḥadīth. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
32
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS IMĀM BUKHĀRĪ’S TEACHERS
The Beginning of Authoring & Compiling Books
Imām Bukhārī v began compiling and writing books from around the
time he started seeking knowledge in order to preserve the knowledge
he acquired for the future so that others could also be given the
opportunity to benefit from this knowledge.
He, himself, said: “When I turned eighteen (18), I had compiled the
fatāwā and statements of the Ṣaḥābahgand Tābiʿīn ‫رحمهم هللا‬. At this time,
ʿUbaydullāh ibn Mūsā was alive. It was also during this period that I
wrote “Tārīkh Kabīr” in Madīnah Munawwarah by the grave of
Rasulullāh n in the moonlit nights.” He also said: “I know a story
regarding approximately all the names of those mentioned in “Tārīkh”.
However, I did not wish to make the book too lengthy.” (Tadhkiratul
Ḥuffāẓ 2/555 and Hadyus Sārī pg. 478)
Imām Bukhārī’s v Teachers
Imām Bukhārī v said: “I have written aḥādīth from over a thousand

reliable scholars and there is no Ḥadīth amongst those that I have
written for which I cannot remember its chain.” (Muqaddamatun Nawawī of
Sharḥ Al-Bukhārī titled Ḥājat-ul-Qārī li Ṣaḥīḥ-ul- Bukhārī pg. 36)
Muḥammad ibn Abī Ḥātim v narrated from Imām Bukhārī v who said:
“I have written aḥādīth from one thousand and eighty (1080) teachers
who were all muḥaddithīn.” He also stated: “I have only narrated from
those teachers who were of the opinion that ʾīmān comprises of both
words and actions.” (Hadyus Sārī pg. 479)
Abū ʿAbdullāh Ḥākim v outlined the details of his (Imām Bukhārī’s)

teachers in “Tārīkh Nayshāpūr” in the following manner:
In Bukhārā:
Muḥammad ibn Salām Al-Bīkandī, Muḥammad ibn Yūsuf, ʿAbdullāh ibn
Muḥammad Al-Musnadī, Harūn ibn Al-Ashʿath ‫ رحمهم هللا‬and their
contemporaries.
33
In Makkah Mukarramah:
Abul Walīd Aḥmad ibn Muḥammad Al-Azraqī, ʿAbdullāh bin Yazīd Al-
Maqrā, Ismāʿīl ibn Sālim As-Ṣāyigh, Abū Bakr ʿAbdullāh ibn Zubayr Al-
Ḥumaydī ‫ رحمهم هللا‬and their contemporaries.
In Madīnah Munawwarah:
Ibrāhīm ibn Al-Mundhir Al-Ḥizāmī, Muṭarraf ibn ʿAbdullāh, Ibrāhīm ibn

Ḥamzah, Abū Thābit Muḥammad ibn ʿUbaydullāh, ʿAbdul ʿAzīz ibn
ʿAbdullāh Al-Uwaysī, Yaḥyā ibn Quzʿah ‫ رحمهم هللا‬and their contemporaries.
In Shām (Syria):
Muḥammad ibn Yūsuf Al-Faryābī, Abū Naḍr Isḥāq ibn Ibrāhīm, Ādam
ibn Abī Iyās, Abul Aymān Al-Ḥakam ibn Nāfiʿ, Ḥaywah ibn Shurayḥ,
Khālid ibn Khallā Qaḍī Ḥimṣ, Khaṭṭāb ibn ʿUthmān, Sulaymān ibn
ʿAbdur Raḥmān, Abul Mughīrah, ʿAbdul Quddūs ‫ رحمهم هللا‬and their
contemporaries.
In Marw:
ʿAli ibn Al-Ḥusayn ibn Shaqīq, ʿAbdān ibn ʿUthmān, Muḥammad ibn
Muqātil, ʿAbdah ibn Al-Ḥakam, Muḥammad ibn Yaḥyā As- Ṣāyigh,
Ḥibbān ibn Mūsā ‫ رحمهم هللا‬and their contemporaries.
In Balkh:
Makkī ibn Ibrāhīm (student of Imām Abū Ḥanīfah v. Muqaddamah Lāmiʿ
pg.17), Yaḥyā ibn Bishr, Muḥammad ibn Abān, Al-Ḥasan ibn Shujāʿ,
Yaḥyā ibn Mūsā, Qutaybah ibn Saʿīd ‫ رحمهم هللا‬and their contemporaries.
Imām Bukhārī v heard many aḥādīth from the muḥaddithīn of Balkh.

(From amongst the twenty-two (22) thulāthiyuāt mentioned in Ṣaḥīḥ
34
Bukhārī, eleven (11) are narrations from Makkī ibn Ibrāhīm v.1
(Muqaddamah Lāmiʿ pg. 30)
Makkī ibn Ibrāhīm v performed sixty (60) ḥajj and married sixty (60)
women. (Tahdhīb 10/263)
In Herāt2:
Aḥmad ibn Walīd Ḥanafī v.
In Nayshāpūr:
Yaḥyā ibn Yaḥyā Tamīmī, Bishr ibn Al-Ḥakam, Isḥāq ibn Ibrāhīm Al-
Ḥanẓalī (Ibn Rāhwayh) 3, Muḥammad ibn Rāfiʿ, Aḥmad ibn Ḥafṣ,
Muḥammad ibn Yaḥyā Ad-Dhuhalī ‫ رحمهم هللا‬and their contemporaries.
In Ray:
Ibrāhīm ibn Mūsā v.
In Baghdād:
1 Imām Bukhārī v narrated half of the thulāthiyyāt from Ḥanafῑs. Although he

is very displeased with the Aḥnāf, he could not leave them out completely. The
ghayr muqallidīn are also against the Ḥanafīs. However, in our city, they call
Ḥanafīs to teach “Hidāyah” in their madāris because their ʿulamāʾ are not
capable of teaching “Hidāyah”. “This is that papad which only the Ḥanafīs are
able to roll thinly.” The ghayr muqallidīn also come to eat it. However, to make
and roll it thinly is the work of the Ḥanafīs. This is an Urdu saying which is
used to refer to something that is difficult to do. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
2 This is a city in Afghanistan and the entire Afghanistan is Ḥanafῑ. [Extracted from
Ifādātush Shaykh]
3 He was the special teacher of Imām Bukhārī v and he will be mentioned

repeatedly He has compiled a Musnad titled: “Musand Isḥāq ibn Rāhwayh”. He
is Imām Abū Ḥanīfah’s v student.” [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
35
Muḥammad ibn ʿĪsā At-Ṭabbaʿ, Muḥammad ibn Sābiq, Surayj ibn

Nuʿmān, Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal, Abū Bakr ibn Aswad, Ismāʿīl bin Khalīl,
Abū Muslim ʿAbdur Raḥmān ibn Yūnus Mustamlī ‫ رحمهم هللا‬and many
others.
In Wāsiṭ:
Ḥassān ibn Abī Ḥassān, Ṣafwān ibn ʿĪsā, Badl ibn Al-Muḥabbar, Ḥaramā
ibn Ḥafṣ, ʿUthmān ibn Muslim, Muḥammad ibn ʿArʿarah4, Sulaymān ibn
Ḥarb, Abū Ḥudhayfah An-Nahdī, Abul Walīd At-Ṭayālisī, ʿĀrim,
Muḥammad ibn Sinān ‫ رحمهم هللا‬and many others.
In Kūfah:
ʿAbdullāh ibn Mūsā, Abū Nuʿaym, Aḥmad ibn Yʿāqūb, Ismāʿīl ibn Abān,
Ḥasan ibn Ar-Rabīʿ, Khālid ibn Makhlad, Saʿad ibn Ḥafṣ, Ṭalaq ibn
Ghannām, ʿUmar ibn Ḥafṣ, Farwah ibn Abil Maghrāʾ, Qubayṣah ibn
ʿUqbah, Abū Ghassān ‫ رحمهم هللا‬and many others. (Qabīṣah is ṣaḥīḥ
(correct).)
In Miṣr (Egypt):
ʿUthmān ibn Ṣāliḥ, Saʿīd ibn Abī Maryam, ʿAbdullāh ibn Ṣāliḥ, Aḥmad
ibn Shuʿayb, Aṣbagh ibn Al- Farj, Saʿīd ibn ʿĪsā, Saʿīd ibn Kathīr ibn
ʿUfayr, Yaḥyā ibn ʿAbdullāh ibn Bukayr ‫ رحمهم هللا‬and their contemporaries.
In Jazīrah:
Aḥmad ibn ʿAbdul Malik Al-Ḥarrānī, Aḥmad ibn Burayd Al-Ḥarrānī,

ʿAmr bin Khalaf, Ismāʿīl ibn ʿAbdullāh Raqqī ‫ رحمهم هللا‬and many others.
By mentioning the names of the cities of his teachers, it becomes

apparent that Imām Bukhārī v travelled to these cities to seek
4Imām Bukhārī v deviated from the Aḥnāf by staying in his company as will
be discussed later. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
36
knowledge. He travelled to these cities and acquired knowledge from

their mashāyikh. (Muqaddamah Nawawī lī Sharḥ Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī pg. 33 onwards)
The Five Categories of Imām Bukhārī’s v Shuyūkh (Teachers)
Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar v divided the shuyūkh of Imām Bukhārī v into five
categories.
These categories are as follows:
1) Those shuyūkh who heard aḥādīth from Tābiʿīn. The likes of

Muḥammad ibn ʿAbdullāh al Anṣārī5, Makkī ibn Ibrāhīm, Abū ʿĀṣim An-
5 This Muḥammad ibn ʿAbdullāh Al-Anṣārī is a student of Imām Abū Yūsuf v

and Imām Zufar v. There are three thulāthī aḥādīth which have been narrated
from him in Ṣạḥīḥ Bukhārī. {Similarly, Makkī ibn Ibrahīm is the student of
Imām Abū Ḥanīfah v and eleven (11) thulāthiyyāt have been narrated from
him.} Abū ʿĀṣim Nabīl, whose name is Ḍaḥḥāq ibn Makhlid, is also a student of
Imām Abū Ḥanīfah v and six (6) thulāthiyyāt have been narrated from him in
Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī. In this way, from amongst the twenty-two (22) thulāthiyyāt of
Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī, twenty (20) are narrated from Aḥnāf.
Note: Special care has been taken in the calculating the thulāthiyyāt of Ṣaḥīḥ
Bukhārī as they are considered to be from amongst the specialities of Ṣaḥīḥ
Bukhārī. From amongst the Ṣiḥāḥ Sittah, this indeed is one of the specialities
of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī. {Some ʿulamāʾ have written commentaries regarding the
thulāthīyyāt of Bukhārī and importance should be given for them to be
written.} However. most of the narrations of Imām Abū Ḥanīfah v are thulāthī,
as is clear from “Masānīd Imām ul Aʿẓam” and his “Kitāb ul Āthār”. {So why
does they forget this speciality of Imām Abū Ḥanīfah v? If they remembers this
speciality of Imām Bukhārī v, they should also remember this speciality of
Imām Abū Ḥanīfah v. It should not be overlooked.} There are also many
thunāʿī and also a few waḥdānī aḥādīth. This is due to the fact that it is
established that Imām Abū Ḥanīfah v met and heard Ḥadīth from a few
Ṣaḥābah g. {Meaning, Imām Ṣāḥib v narrated directly from some Ṣaḥābah g.
Not only the Ḥanafīs claim this. Rather, those Shawāfiʿ who are just and
unbiased also accept this. However, those who are strong and firm reject that
he narrated from the Ṣaḥābah g such as Khaṭīb Baghdādī and Dārquṭnī.
Otherwise, the others who are unbiased such as ʿAllāmah Suyūṭī v have
37
Nabīl (Ḍaḥāk ibn Makhlad), ʿUbaydullāh ibn Mūsā, Abū Nuʿaym,

Khallād ibn Yaḥyā, ʿAlī ibn ʿAyāsh, ʿAṣām ibn ʿAyāsh, ʿAṣām ibn Khālid
‫رحمهم هللا‬. All the aforementioned shuyūkh are amongst the Ṭabiʿ Tābiʿīn.
2) Those shuyūkh who were from the era of the Tābiʿīn, however
they did not have the opportunity of hearing aḥādīth from thiqah
(reliable)Tābiʿīn. The likes of Ādam ibn Abī Iyās, Abū Mus-hir ʿAbdul
Aʿlā ibn Mus-hir, Saʿīd ibn Abī Maryam, Ayūb ibn Sulaymān ibn Bilāl
‫رحمهم هللا‬.
3) This is the middle category (group) of scholars. They heard

aḥādīth from senior Ṭabiʿ Tābiʿīn. The likes of Sulaymān ibn Ḥarb,
Qutaybah ibn Saʿīd, Nuʿaym ibn Ḥammād, ʿAlī ibn Madīnī, Yaḥyā ibn
Maʿīn, Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal, Isḥāq ibn Rāhwayh, Abū Bakr ibn Abī
Shaybah, ʿUthmān ibn Abī Shaybah ‫ رحمهم هللا‬and others. Imām Muslim v
also narrated from them (those mentioned above).
mentioned narrations in “Tabyīḍuṣ Ṣaḥīfah” which Imām Abū Ḥanīfah v

narrated from Ṣaḥābahg. “Tabyīḍus Ṣaḥīfah fī Manāqib Abū Ḥanīfah” by Imām
Suyūṭī Miṣrī-death: 911 A.H. One should also read Ibn Ḥajar Makkī’s v “Al
Khayrātul ḥisān fī Manāqib Abū Ḥanīfah An-Nuʿmān”.} Hence, we understand
from this that the later scholars’ grading of weakness does not affect the
earlier scholars. {Meaning, the chains of the later muḥaddithīn become longer
and a weak narrator is included. However, that same Ḥadīth is narrated by the
mutaqaddimīn muḥaddithīn with very few links. There is no weak narrator in
that chain. For this reason, the grading of weakness by the later scholars do
not affect that of the earlier scholars. This is the meaning of this statement
which has a lot of benefit which one tablīghī has written and another tablīghī
has quoted.} (Muqaddamah Lāmiʿ pg. 30)
Shaykh Muḥammad Zakariyyā v is a tablīghī who is having an academic
discussion. A person can be a tablīghī as well as a great researcher. There is no
contradiction between the two. There are some people who you will meet who
will tell you that by being a tablīghī, you are destroying your knowledge.
Excuse these people. Listen to them with one ear and allow it to pass through
the other ear. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
38
4) Those who studied with Imām Bukhārī v and those who

studied a bit earlier than him. The likes of Muḥammad ibn Yaḥyā Al-
Dhuhalī, Abū Ḥātim Rāzī, Muḥammad ibn ʿAbdur Raḥīm Ṣāʿiqah, ʿAbd
ibn Ḥumayd, Aḥmad ibn Naḍr ‫ رحمهم هللا‬and others. From these teachers,
Imām Bukhārī v mentioned those aḥādīth which he did not hear
directly from his teachers and also those aḥādīth which he did not hear
from anyone else other than them.
5) Those scholars who in terms of their age were actually in the

category of being Imām Bukhārī’s v students but for the purpose of
benefit, he also narrated from them. For example: ʿAbdullāh ibn
Ḥammād Āmlī, ʿAbdullāh ibn Abil ʿĀṣ Al-Khawarzamī, Ḥusayn ibn
Muḥammad Al-Qayānī ‫ رحمهم هللا‬and others. Imām Bukhārī v narrated
some narrations from them. By narrating from them, Imām Bukhārī v
practised on the statement of Wakīʿ that a person cannot be an ʿĀlim
(an Islāmic scholar) until he narrates from those persons who are
older than him, those of his same age and those younger than him.
Imām Bukhārī v himself said: “A muḥaddith is not complete until he
narrates and records from his seniors, contemporaries and juniors.”6
6There is an interesting story regarding the following statement of Imām

Bukhārī v:
.‫َل يكون المحدث كامال حتي يكتب عمن هو فوقه وعمن هو مثله وعمن هو دونه‬
“A Muḥaddith is not complete until he records from his seniors,
contemporaries and juniors.”
This story is mentioned in the introduction of “Awjazul Masālik”, the
commentary of “Muwaṭṭaʾ Mālik” written by Shaykh Muḥammad Zakariyyā v
in the following manner:
Abul ʿAbbās Walīd ibn Ibrāhīm said: “When I became older, I developed an
increased zeal for gaining knowledge of Ḥadīth. I came into the service of
Imām Bukhārī v and I stated my purpose. After listening he said: “Do not
become involved in any field until you become aware of its boundaries and the
extent of its subject matter.” I said: “What are the boundaries and the scope of
my objective?” He said:
39
‫‪A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS‬‬ ‫‪IMĀM BUKHĀRĪ’S TEACHERS‬‬
‫” َل يصير الرجل محدِّثا ً كامِ ال في حديثه اَلِّ بعد ان يكتب أربعا مع أربع مثل أربع في أربع عند أربع بأربع‬
‫الرباعيِّات َل تتِ ِّم اَل بأربع مع أربع‪ ،‬فاذا ت ِّمت له كلها هانَ عليه أربع‬
‫على أربع عن أربع األربع‪ ،‬وكل هذا ُّ‬
‫وابتلى بأربع‪ ،‬فاذا صبر علي ذلك أكرمه هللا في الدنيا بأربع وأثابه بأربع‪“.‬‬
‫‪Then after asking, he explained the statement as follows:‬‬
‫”األربعة التى يحتاج الى كتبها هي أخبار الرسول هللا ﷺ وشرائعه والصحابة ومقاديرهم والتابعين وأحوالهم‬
‫وسائر العلماء وتواريخهم ‪ ،‬مع أسماء رجالهم وكُناهم وأم ِكنَتِهم وأزمِ نتِهم ‪ ،‬كالتحميد مع الخطب والدعاء مع‬
‫التوسل والبسملة مع السورة والتكبير مع الصلوات‪ ،‬مثل المسندات والمرسالت والموقوفات والمقطوعات‪،‬‬
‫فى صغره وفي إدراكه وفي شبابه وفي كهولته‪ ،‬عند فراغه وعند شغله وعند فقره وعند غناه ‪ ،‬باالجبال‬
‫والبحار والبلدان والبراري ‪ ،‬على األحجار واألخزاف والجلود واألكتاف إلى الوقت الذى يمكنه نقله إلى‬
‫بخط أبيه دون غيره ‪ ،‬لوجه هللا‬ ‫ِّ‬ ‫األوراق ‪ ،‬عمن هو فوقه وعمن مثله وعمن هو دونه وعن كتاب أبيه يتقين انه‬
‫تعالى طالبا لمرضاته والعمل بما وافق كتاب هللا عز وجل منها ونشرها بين طالبيها ومحبيها والتاليف في‬
‫احياء ذكر بعده ثم َل تت ِّم هذه األشياء اَل بأربع هي من كسب العبد أعني معرفة الكتاب واللغة والصرف‬
‫والنحو مع أربع هي من اعطاء هللا تعالى أعنى القدرة والصحة والحرص والحفظ ‪ ،‬فإذا تمت له هذه كلها هانَ‬
‫عليه أربع ‪ :‬األهل والمال والولد والوطن وابتلى بأربع ‪ :‬بشماتة األعداء ومالمة األصدقاء وطعن الجهالء‬
‫وحسد العلماء ‪ ،‬فاذا صبر على هذه المِ َحن أكرمه هللا عز وجل في الدنيا بأربع ‪ِّ :‬‬
‫بعز القناعة وبِه ِّمة النفس‬
‫وبِلذِّةِ العلم وبِحياة األبد‪ ،‬وأثابه في اْلخرة بأربع ‪ :‬بالشفاعة لمن أراد من إخوانه وبِظ ِّل العرش يوم َل ظ ِّل إَل‬
‫ظلِّه ويسقى من أراد من حوض نبيه ﷺ وبمجاورة النبيين في أعلى عليين في الجنة‪“.‬‬
‫‪“A person cannot be a complete muḥaddith unless he does the following.‬‬
‫‪He writes four with four: The four things which he must write are: The‬‬
‫‪Prophet’s n narrations and its injunctions, the statements of the Ṣaḥābahgand‬‬
‫‪the number of Ṣaḥābahg, the Tābiʿīn and their conditions and all the ʿulamāʾ‬‬
‫‪and their history. He must also write the following four things with the above‬‬
‫‪four things: the names, kunyah (teknonym), place and era of the narrators. It‬‬
‫‪is necessary that these four are mentioned with the above four in the same‬‬
‫‪manner that it is necessary to mention the praises of Allāh l with a sermon,‬‬
‫‪duʿāʾ with tawassul, bismillāh with a sūrah, takbir-taḥrīmah with ṣalāḥ.‬‬
‫‪Like four in four: He must write the following types of Ḥadīth: musnad,‬‬
‫‪marfūʿ, mawqūf and mursal narrations. The above must be written in all the‬‬
‫‪following stages of his life: In his childhood, at the age of maturity and‬‬
‫‪understanding, in his youth and in his old age.‬‬
‫‪In the following four times in four places: The four times when he should‬‬
‫‪write the aḥādīth are: During his free time. when he is occupied and busy, in‬‬
‫‪times of poverty and in times of prosperity. The four places where he should‬‬
‫‪write are: During his journeys in every place; in the mountains, oceans, cities‬‬
‫‪and deserts.‬‬
‫‪40‬‬
On four things from four things for four things: The four things he should
write on are: Stones, pottery, skins and shoulder blades. He should write on
the above until it becomes possible to copy and transfer it on to pieces of
paper. He should write from his seniors, contemporaries and juniors. He
should also write from his father’s book when there is conviction that it is his
book and not someone else’s book. The four objectives for his writing are as
follows: To seek the pleasure of Allāh l, to do actions which are in accordance
with the book of Allāh l, to spread it amongst students and loved ones, to
write and compile them in a book so that after death, his name remains alive
by this book.
The above things cannot be completed except by four with four: Those four
things which are attained by his effort are: He should make an effort to gain
knowledge about the book, lughah (language), naḥw (syntax) and ṣarf.
(morphology) The four things which are needed before completion are the
things which have been bestowed upon him by Allāh l like: ability, good
health, greed and zeal for knowledge, a strong memory so that he can
preserve it.
When all of the above is complete, four things will become easy and he will be
afflicted with four trials: The four things which he should become detached
from so that gaining and spreading knowledge will become easy are: His
family, his wealth, his children and his country. When he achieves the above,
the four trials he will be afflicted with are: The enmity of his enemies, the
curse of his friends, the criticism of the ignorant and the jealousy of the
ʿulamāʾ.
When he is patient during these adversities, Allāh l will honour him in the
world with four things and reward him with four things in the hereafter: The
four things with which he will be honoured with in his world are: He will be
honoured due to his contentment with little, he will be given strength in his
nafs (inner self), he will receive the sweetness of knowledge, he will remain
alive forever. The four ways in which he will receive rewards are: He will be
granted the honour of interceding for his friends, he will be granted shade
under the throne of Allāh l on that day in which there will be no shade other
than this, he will be granted the honour to give water to those he wishes to
from the fountain of Nabī n and he will be the neighbors of the Prophets in the
highest stages of Jannah.”
When he saw that I became worried, he said: “If this is not possible then study
fiqh (jurisprudence). This is easy; it can be acquired by sitting at home and
41
This categorisation was initially formulated by Abul Faḍl Maqdisī v

(death- 507A.H.). Nawawī v (death- 672 A.H.) has mentioned this in
the introduction of the commentary of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī. Maqdisī
mentioned that the benefit of this is that sometimes Imām Bukhārī v
chooses the shorter chain of narration and sometimes the longer chain.
Therefore, this categorisation reveals the differences in the levels (of
these categories) and in the case of a shorter chain, there will be no
doubt of any narrator being omitted. For example, in some places, the
narration’s chain is as follows: 7 ‫مكى عن يزيد بن أبى عبيد عن سلمة‬.In other
places, the chain is as follows: ‫قتيبة عن بكر بن مضر عن عمروابن الحارث عن بكير عن‬
‫يزيد بن أبى عبيد‬.
One should not think that the names of some narrators have been
omitted8 because the name of Yazīd in the first chain came immediately
after one narrator. This difference in the chains is because one is
shorter and one is longer. This is a very important point. (See
Muqaddamah Nawawī of Sharaḥ of Bukhārī pg. 45) In Ṣaḥiḥ Bukhārī, two
fiqh is the fruit of Ḥadīth and the reward of a jurist is no less than a
muḥaddith.” Thus, I studied fiqh. (Muqaddamah Awjaz pg. 130)
Ḥāfiẓ v considered this story to be farfetched.
Suyuṭī v also mentioned this story in “Tadrībur Rāwī” 2/157 with its chain.
7 Many of the thulāthī narrations in Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī have been narrated with
this chain, i.e., Salamah ibn Akwaʿ’s z chain. There are only two links between
Imām Bukhārī v and Sayyidunā Salamah z, Makkī and Yazīd. However,
another chain is as follows: ‫قتيبة عن بكر بن مضر عن عمرو بن الحارث عن بكر عن يزيد بن أبي عبيد‬
‫عن سلمة‬. In this chain, there are five links between Imām Bukhārī v and Salamah
z. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
8 It would be foolish to think that a narrator has been omitted. Only a person
who has no knowledge of the division of the different categories would think
so. For this reason, the categories and levels have been mentioned. If the
teacher is from a very high category, such as Makkī ibn Ibrāhīm, the sanad
(chain) becomes shorter. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
42
hundred and eighty-nine (289) of Imām Bukhārī’s v teachers are

mentioned. Of these two hundred and eighty-nine (289), one hundred
and thirty-four (134) are Imām Bukhārī’s v teachers only (i.e., they are
not Imām Muslim’s v teachers as well). (Muqaddamah Qasṭalānī pg. 33)
43
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS IMĀM BUKHĀRĪ’S QUALITIES & EXCELLENCES
His Unparalleled Memory 1
Allāh l intended to take great service from Imām Bukhārī v in the field
of Ḥadīth. It is for this reason, He blessed him with an extraordinary
memory. They are some famous incidents regarding his astonishing
memory. The incident that occurred with muḥaddith Dākhilī v has
been mentioned previously. [See ‘Seeking Knowledge’ pg. 26]
Ḥāshid ibn Ismāʿīl and another companion used to say that Imām
Bukhārī v used to go with us to the mashāyikh of Baṣrah in his
childhood (youth) 2, but he never used to write. After sixteen days we
1
Another topic of discussion is the strength of the muḥaddithīn’s memory. In
“Tadhkiratul Ḥuffāẓ”, along with mentioning the ḥuffāẓ, Imām Dhahabī also
mentioned the state of their memory. He mentioned the stories regarding the
memory of many people. Mawlānā Aʿẓmi v has written extensively in his book,
“Nuṣratul Ḥadīth”, which is in refutation to those who reject Ḥadīth. In this
book, the compilation of Ḥadīth has been discussed. When one reads it along
with the references, one would be amazed by the depth of knowledge which
has been compiled in this book from various sources. There are also separate
books which have been written on this topic that are worthy of reading.
The ʿulamāʾ have written that if we had not seen ʿAllāmah Kashmīrī v, we
would not have developed such strong conviction in the strength of the
muḥaddithīn’s memory. He used to say: “When I see something, I would be at
ease for twenty-five years. I could relate it along with its page number and
line.”
It is for this reason that he is known as the walking library. Ḥazrat Shaykhul
Hind v would ask him: “Maulvi Anwar, which kitāb is this from?” (i.e., Ḥazrat
knew that he read about it but he could not remember from which book.) So,
Ḥazrat Mawlānā Kashmīrī v would say: “Ḥazrat, it is in so-and-so kitāb on this
page.” In recent times, Allāh l gave such an example by which the people can
develop a conviction in the stories regarding the memory of the muḥaddithīn
which have mentioned in the books. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
44
admonished him. He said you all have admonished me considerably.

Show me the aḥādīth that you all have written. When we took our
books, there were more than fifteen thousand aḥādīth. Imām Bukhārī v
recited all the aḥādīth from his memory. We started correcting our
books from what he recited to us from his memory. He stated: “Do you
think I am wasting my time?” (Tadhkiratul Ḥuffāẓ 2/556 and Hadyus Sārī pg.
478)
Abū Bakr ibn Abī ʿAyāsh Al-Aʿyan said: “We wrote aḥādīth on
Muḥammad ibn Yūsuf Firyābī’s doorstep from Muḥammad ibn Ismāʿīl,
Imām Bukhārī while he was a beardless youth.” (Hadyus Sārī pg. 478)
Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar v states that Firyābī passed away in 212 A.H. At that
time, Imām Bukhārī v was almost eighteen years old or even younger.
(Ibid)
He became a Shaykh at such a young age due to his excellent memory.
On one occasion, Firyābī narrated the following chain:
.‫حدثنا سفيان عن ابي عروة عن ابي الخطاب عن ابي حمزة‬
Those present did not know who the ones mentioned above Sufyān in
the chain were referring to. Imām Bukhārī v said: “Abū ʿUrwah is
Muḥammad ibn Rāshīd. Abūl Khaṭṭāb is Qatādah ibn Diʿāmah and Abū
Ḥamzah is Anas ibn Mālik.” He said that Thawrī usually mentions the
kunyah (teknonym) of the famous ones. (Ibid)
From amongst those present, no one remembered the kunyah of these

famous people. However, Imām Bukhārī v remembered them. Thus, he
understood and recognised (the chain) immediately.
2The meaning of “childhood” here will be correct for young, mature boy only.
Imām Bukhārī v went for ḥajj at the age of sixteen. This journey could have
only been after that. Therefore, Imām Bukhārī v had undoubtedly reached
maturity by that time. And Allāh l knows best.
45
The famous story of Baghdād has been narrated by quite a few

mashāyikh of Baghdād. They have mentioned that when Imām Bukhārī
v came to Baghdād, the muḥaddithīn gathered to test his memory.
Therefore, they selected one hundred (100) aḥādīth and interchanged
their asnād (chains) and mutūn (texts); this Ḥadīth’s chain with
another Ḥadīth’s text and this Ḥadīth’s text with another Ḥadīth’s
chain. Ten men were appointed and each man had ten (10) aḥādīth.
When the dars (discourse) of the gathering began and the Hadharāt
from within and outside the city were all gathered, one man from
amongst the ten men began to recite the aḥādīth to Imām Bukhārī v
one by one. Imām Bukhārī v continued replying: “I do not know this
Ḥadīth.” In this manner, the man recited all ten of his aḥādīth and
Imām Bukhārī’s v reply remained the same: “‫( ”َل اعرفه‬I do not know it).
Then, the second man started reciting his aḥādīth and then the third
man. In this manner, all ten men recited their aḥādīth and Imām
Bukhārī v continued replying that he did not know those aḥādīth. On
hearing this, those that knew the reality of the situation, looked at each
other and began saying that this man has understood. Those that were
unaware of the situation thought that his memory was not good; that
he was helpless and incapable. When they had finished reciting their
respective aḥādīth, Imām Bukhārī v turned his attention to the first
man and said: “The first Ḥadīth you narrated is not in the manner you
narrated it. Rather, it is like this; and he matched the sanad (chain)
with its correct matn (text). Then, he did the same with the second and
the third Ḥadīth. He mentioned all the aḥādīth in the manner they
recited them and also recited them in the correct way. He did the same
with the second man until he corrected all the aḥādīth that were
recited by all ten men. At this time, everyone acknowledged his great
memory and proficiency. Ḥāfiẓ v mentions this incident with its chain.
Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar v has mentioned: “It is not surprising that he corrected
the mistakes. Rather, it is surprising that he remembered the order and
manner in which each of the aḥādīth were recited to him.” (Ibid)
46
A similar incident occurred in Samarqand. Abul Azhar stated: “Four

hundred (400) muḥaddithīn were gathered in Samarqand and in order
to cause Imām Bukhārī v to make errors, they interchanged (mixed)
the chains of narrations; the Syrian chain of narrators with the ʿIrāqī’s
chain of narrators, the ʿIrāqī’s chain of narrators with the Syrian chain
of narrators, the Ḥaram’s (Makkī’s) chain of narrators with the Yemeni
chain of narrators. However, they could not find any mistakes of Imām
Bukhārī v.” (Ibid)
Yūsuf ibn Mūsā Marwazī has stated: “I was in the Jāmiʿ Masjid of
Baṣrah when someone announced that Muḥammad ibn Ismāʿīl Bukhārī
has arrived. The people started going towards him. I was also amongst
them. There I saw a youth with a fully black beard (who had no trace of
whiteness in his beard), performing ṣalāḥ behind a pillar. When he
finished, the people surrounded him and requested him to conduct a
gathering for the dictation of aḥādīth. He accepted this (request) and a
day and place was fixed. Then, the caller announced that Imām Bukhārī
will be conducting a gathering tomorrow in such and such a place.
Accordingly, approximately one thousand (1000) muḥaddithīn,
fuqahāʾ, ḥuffāẓ and spectators gathered at this place. Imām Bukhārī
arrived at the gathering. First and foremost, he said, “Oh people of
Baṣrah! You have requested me to narrate Ḥadīth. I will present before
you the Ḥadīth of your own city which you do not know of.” The people
were astonished at this. Imām Bukhārī dictated every Ḥadīth in this
gathering and before each Ḥadīth he would say: “You have this Ḥadīth
from such and such a person’s chain of narrators, however, you do not
have it with the chain of narrators which I am about to narrate to you.”
(Ibid)
On one occasion, Isḥāq ibn Rāhwayh v said: “I know from memory,

seventy thousand (70,000) aḥādīth of my book, as though I am reading
from it.” When someone mentioned this statement to Imām Bukhārī v,
he said: “You find this astonishing? Perhaps, there are also people in
this era who know two hundred million aḥādīth from their own book
47
in a similar manner.” He stated: ‫مأتي الف الف‬.3In this statement, he was

referring to himself. (Ibid)
Imām Bukhārī v used to say: “I have memorized one hundred thousand

(100,000) authentic aḥādīth and two hundred thousand (200,000)
unauthentic aḥādīth.” (Ibid)
Imām Bukhārī v would remember all the different variations of the

aḥādīth by looking at any book once. (Ibid)
He said: “Once, I thought about the number of Sayyidunā Anas’z

students. Immediately, three hundred (300) students came into my
mind.” (Hadyus Sārī pg. 488)
Aḥmad bin Ḥamdūn has mentioned that on the occasion of a Janāzah

Ṣalāh, Imām Bukhārī v and Dhuhalī v were both present. Dhuhalī v
was asking Imām Bukhārī v regarding the names of certain narrators
and their weaknesses. Imām Bukhārī v read it out like the speed of an
arrow just like a person would read ‫( قل هو هللا أحد‬Sūrah Ikhlāṣ).
Imām Bukhārī v said: “When I narrate any Ḥadīth from the Ṣaḥābah or
Tābiʿīn, I would know majority of their birth and death dates and place
(of their birth and death).” (Ibid)
He said: “When I reached Balkh, the people requested me to dictate the

aḥādīth from all the shuyūkh from whom I had written aḥādīth. So, I
3 How could there be so many aḥādīth in Imām Bukhārī’s v books? Even if we

were to count the same Ḥadīth with its different chains of narration as an
individual Ḥadīth, this number is still farfetched. However, there is a narration
in “Hadyus Sārī” in which the number is stated as two hundred thousand
(200,000). This is correct. (Fazl)
It seems as though an extra thousand (‫ )الف‬was added mistakenly. Ḥāfiẓ v
mentions this same narration in “Taʿlīq ut Taʿlīq”, in which two hundred
thousand )‫ )مأتي الف‬aḥādīth is mentioned. (417_8/5) (Mawlānā ʿAbdur Rashīd
Nuʿmānī)
48
dictated one thousand (1000) aḥādīth from one thousand (1000)

shuyūkh.
(Muqaddamah Qasṭalānī pg. 39) (Irshādus Sārī, Sharḥ on Bukhārī) (Muqaddamah Lāmiʿ pg. 37)
The scribe of Imām Bukhārī v mentioned that Imām Bukhārī v said: “I

would not sleep at night until I counted how many aḥādīth were added
to my book. It was approximately two hundred thousand (200,000).” I
asked: “Is there any medication to strengthen one’s memory?” He said:
“I do not know.” Then he turned towards me and said: “There is
nothing more beneficial for sharpening one’s memory other than
having zeal for knowledge and placing one’s focus on knowledge in
every moment.”
On one occasion, he said: “There are many aḥādīth I heard in Syria and
I will write in Baṣrah and many I will hear in Baṣrah and write in
Syria.” “The narrator says: “I asked: ‘All?’” Imām Bukhārī v remained
silent.
Character and Qualities
The knowledge of the Messenger of Allāh n had fully established its

effect within Imām Bukhārī v. It is for this reason, Imām Bukhārī v was
extremely pious, God-fearing, one of the greatest ascetics and he used
to be constantly engaged in worship. The following incidents are
testament to this.4
Imām Bukhārī v rarely ate food. He used to be very generous to his

students. Once, when he became ill, his urine was shown to the doctor
(physician), and they said that it is like the urine of the priests who do
not eat curry. Imām Bukhārī v confirmed this and said that he had not
4 Developing a connection with the knowledge of Ḥadīth and being engrossed

in (seeking and teaching this knowledge), creates within a person the nobility
of the Ṣaḥābah g. (Shaykh ʿAbdul ʿAzīz Al-Dehlawī- Fawāʾid Jāmiʿah, translation of ʿUjālā-e-
Nāfiʿah pg. 32)
49
eaten curry for the past forty years. The doctors were asked regarding
the treatment and cure for this illness. They said (the treatment is in)
eating curry. However, Imām Bukhārī v refrained from (eating curry to
treat the illness) until the scholars and mashāyikh insisted. He then
agreed to eat some sugar with roti (bread). (Hadyus Sārī pg. 481)
Imām Bukhārī v was of a wheatish complexion. he was thin, neither tall

nor short. (Tadhkiratul Ḥuffāẓ 2/555)
On one occasion, a debtor withheld twenty-five thousand dirhams from

him, so the people suggested obtaining an order from the ruler and
receive it from him. He said: “If I get the documents from them, they
will have expectations from me, (i.e., they will want me to agree with
them) and I can never trade my religion for the world.” He then
reconciled with the debtor to pay ten dirhams every month (obviously
how could such a large sum be received?) Consequently, he lost all his
wealth. (Hadyus Sārī pg. 480)
He stated: “I have never bought or sold anything myself. Rather, I

would tell someone to go and buy what I needed on my behalf.” He was
asked: “Why do you do this?” He replied: “Because there is always
some form of inaccuracy and doubt in conducting transactions.”
(Meaning, I do not conduct the transaction myself in order to avoid
falling into this.) (Ibid)
On one occasion, wealth sent by Abū Ḥafṣ v5 was given to Imām

Bukhārī v. Some merchants from Syria came and requested him to sell
this wealth in exchange of a $5000 profit. He replied: “Go back today.”
Thereafter, the following day, other merchants came and requested
him to sell this wealth in exchange for a $10 000 profit. So, he replied:
“I made an intention last night to give it to the first group of merchants.
Thus, I do not wish to annul this intention.” (Ibid)
5Abū Ḥafṣ v and this incident has been mentioned previously in the footnote
on page 23-24. This will also be mentioned on page 97.
50
On one occasion, when his slave-girl was entering the house, there was
an inkpot in front of him and her foot collided with the inkpot. He said
to her: “How were you walking?” The slave-girl replied: “How can I
walk when there is no path to walk on?” He stretched out both his
hands and said: “Go, you are free.” It was said to him, “She displeased
you.” He replied: “I pleased her by my action.” (Ibid)
On one occasion, he became tired while writing the takhrīj for “Kitābut
Tafsīr” in Firabar. So, he laid down. His scribe asked him: “You always
say that I do not do any action of which I have no knowledge of. Inform
me, what is the benefit in this lying down?” He replied: “Today, I have
become tired and this is a province along the borders of the country.
Thus, I fear the enemy’s conspiracies. Therefore, I deem it appropriate
that I rest and be prepared so that if the enemy attacks, we will be able
to do something.” (Ibid)
This same scribe of Imām Bukhārī v said: “Many a time, Imām Bukhārī
would practice archery on horseback. I only saw him miss a target
twice. He narrates that once his arrow struck a plank of the river’s
bridge which caused it to split. He dismounted, removed the arrow and
said: “Let us return.” He turned to me and said, “Oh Abū Jaʿfar! I have a
job for you”. On saying this, he became short of breath. Then he said,
“The job is that you go to the owner and inform him that we have
damaged the plank. Request him to forgive us for this and give us
permission to change it or he should take the cost for its repair from
us.” The owner of the bridge, Ḥumayd ibn Al-Akhḍar, said: “Tell Abū
ʿAbdullāh that whatever you did is overlooked and our entire
possessions are sacrificed for you.” On hearing this, Imām Bukhārī v
became radiant with happiness and on that day, he recited five
hundred (500) Ḥadīth to those who came from abroad to this
gathering and gave three hundred (300) dirhams in charity.
On one occasion, on hearing a Ḥadīth from Imām Bukhārī v, Abū

Maʿshar Ḍarīr became extremely happy and began to shake his hands
and head. When Imām Bukhārī v saw this, he smiled. (Then, it occurred
51
to him, that perhaps this is also a form of backbiting.) Thus, he sought

forgiveness. He was pardoned. (Ibid)
He said: “From the time I found out that backbiting is ḥarām, I never
backbited.”
He also said: “I have hope that Allāh l will not take me to task for
backbiting”. (Ibid)
Ḥāfiẓ mentioned: “Imām Bukhārī was very cautious about

commenting on the narrators of Ḥadīth. Many times, when grading and
commenting on the narrators’ status and reliability, he would use
words like ‘they have remained silent about him’, ‘there is a discussion
regarding him’, ‘they have left him out’ etc. It was very rare that he
would call a person a fabricator or a liar.” (Ibid)
An objection was made against him that “In “Tārīkh”, you have
mentioned the ills of others, so how can you claim that you will not be
held liable in the hereafter (for backbiting)?” He said: “We have simply
narrated and quoted this information. We have not mentioned this
from our personal opinions.” The Messenger of Allāh n also said
regarding a man: "‫“ – ”بئس اخو العشيرة‬He is a bad member of his tribe.”
(i.e., the Messenger of Allāh n mentioned his evil in order to make the
Muslims aware of it.) Similarly, the muḥaddithīn informed the people
regarding the condition of narrators in the chain so that they will not
fall into error. Therefore, it is not backbiting regardless of if the
muḥaddith narrated it himself or if he quoted it from someone else.6
6A great Buzrug said that: “If we do not grade and highlight the unreliability of
weak narrators, no difference will remain between a religious person and a
non-religious person. As a result, the Messenger of Allāh n will ask us on the
Day of Judgement, “Why have you not defended our aḥādīth?” How will we
reply to this? We do not wish to have disputes between us and the Messenger
of Allāh n. We are prepared to dispute with these mutakallim fīhi narrators.
However, we do not have the courage to dispute with the Messenger of Allāh
52
On one occasion, a wasp bit Imām Bukhārī v in his ṣalāh seventeen

times. However, he did not break his ṣalāh. He said: “I was reading one
verse and I wished to complete it.” On completing his ṣalāh he said,
“What is it that is afflicting me with such difficulty?” When he checked,
it was a wasp.7
Close to Bukhārā, Imām Bukhārī v was involved in the construction of

a guest house. Many people were helping Imām Bukhārī v. However,
he himself was also involved in moving the bricks. Muḥammad ibn Abī
Ḥātim Warrāq v says that I said to Imām Bukhārī v: “It is not necessary
for you to go through this trouble; we will do it for you.” Imām Bukhārī
v replied: “This is beneficial for me”.
n. Thus, when we do jarḥ (grade narrators as unreliable and discuss their

weaknesses) based on this, it is not considered as backbiting. This is a way of
protecting the Dīn because if one is not aware that a narrator is weak, then
one would consider a person who is not on Dīn (a non-religious person) to be
a person of the Dīn (religious person). One would consider something that is
not a Sunnah to be a Sunnah and to consider something that is not part of the
religion to be part of it or to consider something that is not Sunnah to be a
Sunnah, is altering the Dīn and this is very harmful”. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
7 His ṣalāh was such that it makes one reminisce the ṣalāh of the Ṣaḥābah g. A
famous incident regarding this which is mentioned in Abū Dāwūd and one of
the tarjumatul bāb of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī is as follows: On one occasion, whilst
returning from an expedition, a Ṣaḥābī was performing taḥajjud ṣalāh. Whilst
he was performing his ṣalāh, the enemy shot an arrow from behind and blood
began to flow. However, he did not go into rukūʿ until he had completed the
sūrah. After completing the rukūʿ, he woke up his companion. He [the
companion] saw that there was a lot of blood, so he asked, “Why did you not
awake me immediately (as soon as the arrow struck)?”
The Ṣaḥābī replied: “I had commenced a sūrah and did not wish to go into to
rukūʿ without completing the sūrah.” [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
53
Imām Bukhārī v once slaughtered a cow for the people and prepared a
feast in which more than a hundred people came. He did not expect
such a large number of people to come. We bought three dirhams
worth of rotis from Firabar. In that era, one would receive five mun [a
measurement] of rotis for one dirham. We placed the rotis in front of
the people and after they ate there were still many rotis remaining.
One mun is equivalent to sixty-eight tola and three maaShāh. (Awzān
Sharīʿah by Muftī Muḥammad Shafīʿ v) Generally, it is known to be more
than this.
On one occasion, in his gathering a person took out a straw from his
beard and placed it on the ground of the masjid. Imām Bukhārī v
noticed this. He found an opportunity when the people were not
looking. He placed the straw in his pocket, took it outside and threw it
away. (Ibid)
In this manner, he paid special attention to the cleanliness of the

masjid.8
The scribe of Imām Bukhārī v mentioned that he used to accompany

him on journeys. I had to spend the night in the same room with him in
all seasons other than summer. I have seen that Imām Bukhārī v would
get up fifteen or twenty times in the night, light the lamp and put
marks on the aḥādīth and then go to sleep. I said: “You put yourself
8Cleaning the masjid is a very honourable task. It is not only the responsibility
of the masjid’s caretaker, to clean the masjid but rather, it is the responsibility
of every Muslim to ensure that they play a role in keeping the masjid clean.
Regarding this, there is a Ḥadīth in Jāmiʿ Tirmidhī which states that, when you
see a person taking care of the masjid then bear testimony to his Imān, for
verily Allāh Taʿālā says: ‫ إنما يأمر مساجد هللا من آمن باهلل واليوم اْلخر‬until the end of the
verse. [Only those who believe in Allāh and the last day frequent and take care
of the Masājid of Allāh…] Cleaning and lighting arrangements are all part of
maintaining the masjid. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
54
through a lot of trouble, why do you not wake me up? He said: “You
are a young man, I do not want to disturb your sleep.”
Imām Bukhārī v used to perform thirteen rakʿahs in the last portion of

the night and he would perform witr of one rakʿah. In Ramaḍān, Imām
Bukhārī v would perform tarāwīḥ with his students, and he would
recite twenty verses in each rakʿah. By reciting in this manner, he
completed the recital of the entire Qurʾān. In the latter portion of the
night, he would recite between a half to one-third of the Qurʾān and
complete the recital of the Qurʾān in three nights. He would finish the
Qurʾān around the time of ifṭār (breaking of fast) and he would say that
duʿāʾs (supplications) are accepted on every occasion on which the
Qurʾān is completed. (Hadyus Sārī pg. 481)
Imām Bukhārī v said: “I supplicated (made duʿāʾ) twice which were

immediately accepted.9 Now, I do not wish to make a duʿāʾ out of fear
that by it being accepted in this world, my good deeds will be
decreased in the hereafter.”10 (Hadyus Sārī pg. 480)
9Therefore, one should be very particular in engaging in duʿāʾ and also call
one’s students to be part of the duʿāʾ. This is not a bidʿah (innovation). From
this story, one can deduce that according to Imām Bukhārī v, tarāwīḥ and
taḥajjud are separate prayers in Ramaḍān. Those ghayr muqallidīn who are of
the opinion that tarāwīḥ consist of eight (8) rakʿahs disagree with this. Their
opinion is that both are one ṣalāh; if it is read after ʿishāʾ ṣalāh in the
beginning of the night, it is tarāwīḥ and if it is read in the latter portion of the
night, it is taḥajjud. They use the following Ḥadīth of Sayyidatunā ʿĀʾishāh d
which is mentioned in Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī as evidence:
‫ ما كان يزيد في رمضان وَل غيره على إحدى عشرة ركعة يصلى أربعا ثم يصلي أربعا وَل نسأل من‬10
.‫حسنهن وطولهن ثم يوتر بثالث‬
From this Ḥadīth, they establish that tarāwīḥ consists of eight rakʿahs.
However, this Ḥadīth is actually regarding taḥajjud. Imām Bukhārī v mentions
this Ḥadīth twice in his book; under the chapter of tarāwīḥ and under the
chapter of taḥajjud. Thus, as it is mentioned under the chapter of tarāwīḥ, they
have considered this to be evidence to support their opinion. However, they
55
Hākim v has quoted two poems from Imām Bukhārī v which consist of
beautiful advice.
‫فعسي ان يكون موتك بغته‬ ‫اغتنم في الفراغ فضل ركوع‬
‫ذهبت نفس الصحيحة فلته‬ ‫كم صحيح رأيت من غير سقم‬
Treasure the virtues of ṣalāh in your free time
Perhaps, death will overcome you suddenly.
How many healthy people with no trace of illness have I seen?
Whose healthy souls have departed suddenly.
Imām Bukhārī v himself departed from this world in a similar fashion

as will be discussed in the upcoming chapters in this book. (Ibid pg. 481)
should look at what Imām Bukhārī v practised upon. He performed both

tarāwīḥ and taḥajjud in one night. Thus, it can be deduced that according to
Imām Bukhārī v, they are separate prayers. The ghayr muqallidīn are
deprived of this; if they perform tarāwīḥ, they do not perform taḥajjud and if
they perform taḥajjud, they do not perform tarāwīḥ. Muḥaddith Kabīr, Amīrul
Hind Fil Ḥadīth, Mawlānā Ḥabībur Raḥmān Aʿẓmī v has written extensively
regarding this issue. In his treatise, “Rakʿah wa Tarāwīḥ”, he refuted them in
such a manner that their evidences became like scattered dust [i.e., their
evidences were not strong enough to withstand Mawlānā’s refutation]. They
then rebutted this in “Anwārul Misbāḥ”. Mawlānā Aʿẓmī then wrote footnotes
on this, titled “Muzayyal biradd Anwārul Misbāḥ”. Pearls of knowledge are
scattered throughout these footnotes which refutes “Anwārul Misbāḥ”. It is for
this reason that it is said that the ghayr muqallidīn only shake hands
(muṣāfaḥah) with Imām Bukhārī v with one hand and not with both hands. If
they find that which is in accordance with what they desire, they take and
accept it. For instance, they accept and take Imām Bukhārī’s v opinion
regarding rafaʿ yadayn and qiraʾah behind the Imām. However, with regards
to other masāʾil, they say we are mujtahidīn, we do not follow Imām Bukhārī
v. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
56
Upon hearing the news of Imām Darimī’s v11 death, Imām Bukhārī v
also recited a poem at that time. This poem is as follows:
‫وبقاء نفسك َلأبا لك أفجع‬ ‫ان عشت تفجع باألحبة كلهم‬
If you remain alive, you will have to mourn the loss of all your beloved ones.
And your survival will be the cause of more pain.
In some books, the second stanza is as follows:
‫وفناء نفسک َل أبا لک أفجع‬
Your passing will cause more pain.
(Qurratul- ʿUyūn in Tadhkiratul Funūn pg. 72 and Tarjumān us Sunnah 1/258)
11 Imām Dārimī v was from the same era as Imām Bukhārī v. He passed away
a little before Imām Bukhārī v. Imām Dārimī v authored a book titled
“Musnad Dārimī”, which is a sunan and holds a very high position. However, it
is strange that it has not gained the same level of acceptance as the Ṣiḥāḥ-e-
Sittah. This acceptance is from Allāh l. Having the ability does not necessitate
acceptance. Sometimes, along with one’s capability, one’s work is accepted
and sometimes although one is capable, one’s work is not accepted. The
objective is to gain acceptance along with developing one’s ability. Simply
having the ability should not be the objective. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
57
58
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS WORDS OF PRAISE
Praises from the People of Knowledge
The rank of Imām Bukhārī v, due to his great virtue and excellence,
was such that besides his contemporaries and students, the tongues of
his own mashāyikh and akābir were also moist in singing his praises.
Additionally, everyone acknowledged his superiority in the field of
aḥādīth. Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar v mentioned a few statements and he
thereafter mentioned that if the statements of the mutaʾakh-khirīn
(later scholars) were also mentioned, ink and paper would have
become depleted 1 . However, there is no need to mention their
statements because when those who have seen and met him praise him
so highly, it is clear that those who came after will also narrate from
them.
His Shaykh, ʿAbdullāh ibn Muḥammad Al-Masnadī v said: “Muḥammad

ibn Ismāʿīl is the Imām (leader) in this field (of Ḥadīth). Condemn
those who do not consider him an Imām (leader).” He also stated:
“There are three ḥuffāẓ of our era”. He then mentioned Imām Bukhārī’s
v name first.
1Ḥāfiẓ v is drowned in his love for Imām Bukhārī v. Consequently, he has

exaggerated in praising Imām Bukhārī v. Such a statement can only be made
regarding Allāh l and His Kalām as mentioned in the following verse:
.‫ولو إنا ما في األرض من شجرة أقالم والبحر يمده من بعده سبعة أبحر ما نفدت كلمات هللا‬
If all the trees on earth were pens and the oceans were supplemented by
another seven oceans, Allāh’s words would never be exhausted.
Therefore, it can be said that what is meant here is not the amount of paper
and ink for Allāh’s Kalām, rather Ḥāfiẓ v is referring to the amount which is
with him. We interpret it in this manner so that his statement can be valid.
Interpretation in this manner is done with the statements of Buzrugs so that
we can accept them. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
59
ʿAlī ibn Ḥajar v said: “Khurāsān gave birth to three noble

personalities.” Then, he mentioned Imām Bukhārī’s v name first and
then stated: “The one with the most knowledge, understanding and
insight of aḥādīth from amongst these three personalities was Imām
Bukhārī v.”
Aḥmad ibn Isḥāq Sarmārī v said: “Whoever wishes to see the most
truthful and rightly guided faqīh (Islāmic jurist), should look at Imām
Bukhārī v.”
Ḥāshid v said: “I saw ʿAmr ibn Zurārah and Muḥammad ibn Rāfiʿ asking
Bukhārī questions regarding the ʿilal (defects) of aḥādīth. “When they
were leaving, they said to those present: ‘This man, Abū ʿAbdullāh is a
greater faqīh and ʿālim (scholar) than us. Do not be deceived.’”
He also said: “One day, we were by Isḥāq ibn Rāhwayh and ʿAmr ibn
Zurārah was dictating2 from Imām Bukhārī v and the muḥaddithīn
were writing. Isḥāq stated: He is a better faqīh than me.” At that time,
Imām Bukhārī v was a young man.
ʿAbdullāh ibn Muḥammad Al-Farhyānī v said: “I was in the gathering of

Ibn Ashkāb when a person who was a ḥāfiẓ of Ḥadīth entered and said
something regarding Imām Bukhārī v. Ibn Ashkāb became angry and
left the gathering.”
ʿAbdullāh ibn Muḥammad v said: “When Aḥmad ibn Ḥarb passed away,
Isḥāq ibn Rāhwayh and Imām Bukhārī v were walking behind the
2There would be so many students in one gathering that the teacher’s voice
would not reach all of them. Sometimes, a muḥaddith would have twenty
thousand (20,000) writers in one gathering and, in that era, there was no
microphone system. Thus, one person would be the muballigh; he would
repeat whatever the teacher says loudly. In this manner, everyone would be
able to hear and write. This is known as imlāʾ. This was one of the methods
used by the muḥaddithīn in their gatherings. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
60
janāzah procession. I saw the people of knowledge looking at each

other and saying that Muḥammad is a greater faqīh than Isḥāq.”
Yaḥyā ibn Jaʿfar Baykandī v said: “If it was possible for me to give a
portion of my life to prolong the life of Imām Bukhārī v, I would have
done so as my death is the death of one person while the death of
Imām Bukhārī v is the loss of knowledge.” He also used to say: “If it
was not for Imām Bukhārī, there would have been no pleasure in living
in Bukharā.”
Abū Bakr ibn Abī Shaybah v and Muḥammad ibn ʿAbdullāh ibn Numayr
v said: “We have never seen anyone like Imām Bukhārī.” Ibn Abī
Shaybah v used to call him “Al-Bāzil”, i.e., the complete; the excellent.
Imām Tirmidhī v stated that Imām Bukhārī v was by Ibn Munīr. When
he got up ʿAbdullāh ibn Munīr said: “Oh Abū ʿAbdullāh! May Allāh make
you the adornment for this ummah.” Imām Tirmidhī v stated: “Allāh
accepted this duʿāʾ of his.”
Even though ʿAbdullāh ibn Munīr v was the shaykh (teacher) of Imām
Bukhārī v and there are narrations from him in Ṣaḥiḥ Bukhārī, he still
wrote aḥādīth from Imām Bukhārī v and he used to say: “I am his
student”. He also used to say: “I have not seen anyone like him.”
Rajāʾ ibn Rajāʾ v said: “Imām Bukhārī’s virtue over the other ʿulamāʾ
(Islāmic scholars) are like the virtue of men over women.” He also said:
“He is one of the living signs of Allāh l on the surface of this earth.”
Ḥusayn ibn Ḥurayth v said: “I do not know of anyone similar to

Muḥammad ibn Ismāʾīl. It is as if he was born and created for Ḥadīth.”
Fatḥ ibn Nūḥ Nayshāpurī v said: “I saw Imām Bukhārī v sitting on the
right side of ʿAlī ibn Madīnī v. When ʿAlī would narrate any Ḥadīth he
would look towards Imām Bukhārī out of awe for him.” Imām Bukhārī
v said: “I do not consider myself lower in rank to anyone except to ʿAlī
61
ibn Madīnī even though sometimes I would narrate such aḥādīth which
he was not aware of.” When this statement of Imām Bukhārī v reached
ʿAlī ibn Madīnī v, he said: “Do not consider his statement. He himself
has not seen anyone who is of his calibre.” Imām Bukhārī v said: “ʿAlī
asked me regarding the shuyukh of Khurāsān. I mentioned Muḥammad
ibn Salām however he did not know of him. Once, he mentioned to me,
“Oh ʿAbdullāh! We also like whoever you like.”
ʿUmar ibn ʿAlī Al-Falās v said: “Those aḥādīth that Imām Bukhārī do
not know, they are not Ḥadīth.” He also mentioned: “There is no one
like him in Khurāsān.”
Ḥāshid said: “Aḥmad ibn Abī Bakr Zuhrī told me: “According to us,
Imām Bukhārī v is a greater faqīh and more knowledgeable in Ḥadīth
than Imām Aḥmad v.” A person from amongst those who were present
said: “You are exaggerating.” So, Aḥmad Zuhrī said: “If you had met
Imām Mālik v and saw his face and Imām Bukhārī’s v face, you will
consider them both equal with regards to Ḥadīth and fiqh.” Ḥāfiẓ ṣāḥib
v mentioned: “The meaning of this statement is that their methodology
of analysis and understanding was similar with regards to Ḥadīth and
fiqh.”
Qutaybah ibn Saʿīd v says: “I have sat with jurists, ascetics and
extremely devoted worshippers. However, from the time I gained the
ability to understand, I have not found anyone like Imām Bukhārī. His
virtue amongst the people of his era is like the virtue of Ḥazrat
ʿUmaraamongst the Ṣaḥābah g.”
According to Qutaybah, if Imām Bukhārī v was among the Ṣaḥābah g,

he would have been a special sign. He also said: “I have pondered over
the Ḥadīth and even over varying opinions and rulings. I have also sat
with the jurists, ascetics and extremely devoted worshippers.
However, I have not seen anyone like Imām Bukhārī.” On one occasion,
he was asked regarding the ruling of a divorce issued in a state of
intoxication. At that moment, Imām Bukhārī v came. He [Qutaybah]
62
said: “Here is Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal, Isḥāq ibn Rāhwayh, and ʿAlī ibn
Madīnī. Allāh l has sent them all to you.” On saying this, he pointed to
Imām Bukhārī v. (i.e., Imām Bukhārī v is the embodiment of the
excellences of these three.)
Mahyār v said: “I have seen Qutaybah ibn Saʿīd and Yaḥyā ibn Maʿīn
coming and going to Imām Bukhārī v. Yaḥyā ibn Maʿīn was the follower
of Imām Bukhārī with regards to knowledge.”
Ibrāhīm ibn Muḥammad ibn Salām v stated: “The great muḥaddithīn

(he then mentioned the names of the great muḥaddithīn of the time)
accepted Imām Bukhārī’s v verdict regarding the Ḥadīth over theirs.”
Yaʿqūb ibn Ibrāhīm Dūrqī and Naʿīm ibn Ḥammād Khuzāʿī said:
“Bukhārī is the faqīh of this ummah.” Bundār Muḥammad ibn Bashār
said: “Bukhārī is the greatest faqīh from amongst Allāh l’s creation in
our time.” When Imām Bukhārī v reached Baṣrah, Bundār said: “Sayyid
al-Fuqahāʾ (the leader of all jurists) has arrived.”
ʿAbdullāh ibn Yūsuf al-Tinnisī said to Imām Bukhārī v: “If you notice
any deficiency in my books, inform me.”
63
Some Statements of Contemporaries and His Students
Muḥaddith ʿAjlī v said: “I saw Abū Zarʿah and Abū Ḥātim3 listening
attentively to Imām Bukhārī. It was as though Imām Bukhārī was an
entire ummah (nation). He was righteous and he was an accomplished
scholar. He was proficient in everything. He was a greater ʿālim than
Dhuhalī.”
The muḥaddith Dārimī v said: “Imām Bukhārī is a greater ʿālim, faqīh

and collector of aḥādīth than us.” He was informed about a Ḥadīth that
Imām Bukhārī v graded as authentic. So, he (Dārimī) said: “He [Imām
Bukhārī] is more insightful than me and he is the most intelligent of
Allāh’s creation. He has understood the amr (commands) and nahī
(prohibitions) which Allāh l has revealed in His Book and through his
Rasūl n. He would read the Qurʾān with full concentration. He ponders
upon the examples mentioned in the Qurʾān and recognises the ḥalāl
(lawful) and the ḥarām (unlawful). I have seen the ʿulamāʾ of the
Ḥaramayn, Ḥijāz and Shām (Syria). However, I have not seen anyone
like him.”
Ḥātim ibn Manṣūr v said: “He attained such a high rank with regards to
his understanding and insight in knowledge that he was one of the
signs from amongst the signs of Allāh l.”
3 This is Abū Ḥātim Rāzī v. They are amongst the great muḥaddithīn of Imām
Bukhārī’s v era. Abū Zarʿah Rāzī was a very great muḥaddith. The following
story has been mentioned about him. On one occasion, a man said that he told
his wife: “If Abū Zarʿah Rāzī does not know one hundred thousand (100,000)
aḥādīth, you are divorced.” He then came to Abū Zarʿah Rāzī and asked him: “If
I told my wife this [as mentioned above], has my wife been divorced or not?”
He replied: “No. I have memorised one hundred thousand (100,000) aḥādīth.”
64
The faqīh Maḥmūd ibn Naḍr v said: “I have been to Baṣrah, Shām, Ḥijāz
and Kūfah and I have seen their ʿulamāʾ. Whenever Imām Bukhārī was
mentioned in front of them, they would give him a position of virtue
over themselves.”
Abū Sahl v said: “I have seen over thirty (30) ʿulamāʾ of Miṣr (Egypt).
They would say: “To see Imām Bukhārī is one of our worldly needs.”
Ṣāliḥ ibn Muḥammad Jazrah v said: “Imām Bukhārī was the best
memoriser of aḥādīth. I organised gatherings of imlāʾ (dictation) for
him. There were twenty thousand (20,000) present in that gathering.”
Faḍlak Rāzī was asked who has a stronger memory, Imām Bukhārī v or
Abū Zarʿah Rāzī? He said “I only met Imām Bukhārī on one occasion.
That was on a journey between Ḥalwān and Baghdād. I remained with
him for one manzil and I tried to narrate to him such a Ḥadīth which he
had not heard before. However, I was unsuccessful. As for Abū Zarʿah,
it would have been possible for me to narrate to him gharīb aḥādīth,
equivalent to the hairs on his head.”4
Ibn Khuzaymah v said: “There is no greater muḥaddith, under the sky

than Imām Bukhārī.”
Imām Tirmidhī v said: “There is no one more knowledgeable with

regards to asnād and ʿilal (chains and their defects and weaknesses)
than Imām Bukhārī.”
Imām Muslim v said: “I testify that there is no one like you in this
world.” On reciting the Ḥadīth regarding the atonement for a gathering,
Imām Muslim v asked Imām Bukhārī v: “Do you know of a Ḥadīth
better than this?” Imām Bukhārī v said: “There are better aḥādīth, but
they are maʿlūl.” Imām Muslim v said: “Lā ilāha illallāh (there is no god
4From this, it becomes apparent that Imām Bukhārī’s v status was higher
than that of Abū Zarʿah’s. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
65
but Allāh)” and he started to tremble. Then, he asked, “What is the

ʿillah?” Imām Bukhārī v said: “That which Allāh has kept concealed, I
will also keep concealed.” Then, when Imām Muslim v became
persistent and was on the verge of crying, Imām Bukhārī v pointed out
the weakness to him. Imām Muslim v then said: “Only a very jealous
person could hate you, I testify that there is no one in this world like
you.”
In a narration, it is mentioned that when Imām Muslim v came, he

kissed him between his eyes and he said: “O teacher of teachers, leader
of the muḥaddithīn, doctor of the ʿilal found in Ḥadīth, allow me to kiss
your feet ...” (Hadyus Sārī pg. 482-486)
Ḥātim Warrāq v said: “I saw Imām Bukhārī walking behind the

Messenger of Allāh n in a dream. Imām Bukhārī would place his foot in
exactly the same spot where the Messenger of Allāh n lifted his foot.”5
Nujaym ibn Fuḍayl saw in a dream that the Messenger of Allāh n was
coming out of his grave. Imām Bukhārī v was walking behind him and
was placing his feet in the footprints of Nabī n.
Firabrī saw the Messenger of Allāh n in a dream. The Messenger of

Allāh n asked: “Where do you intend to go?” Firabrī replied: “To
Muḥammad ibn Ismaʿīl”. The Messenger of Allāh n then said: “Convey
my salām to him.”6 (Hadyus Sārī pg. 489)
5 This is an indication towards Imām Bukhārī’s v great regard for ittibāʿ

sunnah [emulating and adopting the sunnah]. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
6 This is from amongst the glad tidings of his acceptance. [Extracted from Ifādātush
Shaykh]
66
67
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS STUDENTS & DISCIPLES
The Students and Disciples of Imām Bukhārī v
Some of Imām Bukhārī’s v students were also his mashāyikh and

teachers. Some of their names are:
ʿAbdullāh ibn Muḥammad Al-Masnadī, ʿAbdullāh ibn Munīr, Isḥāq ibn

Aḥmad Al- Sarmārī, Muḥammad ibn Khalaf ibn Qutaybah.
From amongst his age group, the following persons were honoured to
be his (Imām Bukhārī’s v) students:
Abū Zarʿah Rāzī, Abū Ḥātim Rāzī, Ibrāhīm Al-Ḥarbī, Abū Bakr ibn Abī
ʿĀṣim1 , Mūsā ibn Ḥārūn Al-Jamāl, Muḥammad ibn ʿAbdullāh ibn
Muṭayyin, Isḥāq ibn Aḥmad ibn Zayrak Al Fārsī, Muḥammad ibn
Qutaybah Al Bukhārī, Abū Bakr Al-Aʿyan ‫رحمهم هللا‬.
From amongst the great and famous muḥaddithīn, the following

scholars have acquired benefit:
Ṣāliḥ ibn Muḥammad Jazrah, Imām Muslim, Abul Faḍl Aḥmad ibn
Salmah, Abū Bakr ibn Khuzaymah 2, Muḥammad ibn Naṣr Al-Marwazī3,
Imām Nasāʾī ‫رحمهم هللا‬. They have also narrated indirectly from him. Imām
Tirmidhī, ʿUmar ibn Muḥammad Al-Buḥayrī, Abū Bakr ibn Abī Dunyā,
Abū Bakr Al-Bazzār4, Ḥusayn ibn Muḥammad Al-Qabbānī, Yaʿqūb ibn
Yūsuf Al-Akhram, ʿAbdullāh ibn Muḥammad ibn Nājiyah, Sahl ibn
Shādhwiyah Al- Bukhārī, ʿUbaydullāh ibn Wāṣil, Al-Qāsim ibn
Zakariyyā Al-Muṭriz, Abū Quraysh Muḥammad ibn Jumuʿah,
Muḥammad ibn Muḥammad ibn Sulaymān Al- Bāghandī, Ibrāhīm ibn
1 He is the author of “Kitāb-us-Sunnah”. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]

2 He is the author of “Ṣaḥīḥ ibn Khuzaymah”. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
3 He is the author of “Mukhtaṣar Qiyām-ul-Layl”. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
4 He is the author of “Musnad Bazzār”. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
68
Mūsā Al-Jarīrī, ʿAlī ibn Al-ʿAbbās At-Tābiʿī, Abū Ḥāmid Al-Aʿmashī, Abū
Bakr Aḥmad ibn Muḥammad ibn Ṣadaqah Al-Baghdādī, Isḥāq ibn
Dāwūd Al-Ṣawāf, Ḥāshid ibn Ismāʿīl Al- Bukhārī, Muḥammad ibn
ʿAbdullāh ibn Al- Junayd, Muḥammad ibn Mūsā An-Nahr Tibrī, Jaʿfar
ibn Muḥammad Al-Naysābūrī, Abū Bakr ibn Dāwūd, Abul Qāsim Al-
Baghwī, Abū Muḥammad ibn Ṣāʿid, Muḥammad ibn Ḥārūn Al-Ḥaḍramī,
Al-Ḥusayn ibn Ismāʿīl Al-Ḥāmilī Al Baghdādī ‫رحمهم هللا‬.
Firabrī v said: “Ninety thousand people heard Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī from him
[i.e., Imām Bukhārī] and I am the only narrator remaining from
amongst the narrators of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī. There are no others
remaining.” (Hadyus Sārī pg. 491)
Firabrī’s name was Muḥammad ibn Yūsuf ibn Maṭar ibn Ṣāliḥ ibn Bishr.
His kunyah was Abū ʿAbdullāh. Firabar is the name of a village in
Bukhārā. It is permissible to pronounce the ‘fā’ with a fatḥah and a
kasrah.
Firabrī v heard Ṣaḥīḥ twice from Imām Bukhārī v: once in 248 A.H. in
Firabar and the second time in 252 A.H. in Bukhārā. Firabrī passed
away in 320 A.H. Firabrī v also has heard from Qutaybah ibn Saʿīd v
and ʿAlī ibn Khushram v who are among the shuyūkh of Imām Bukhārī
v and Imām Muslim v. Thus, Firabrī shares the honour of narrating
from both these teachers of Imām Bukhārī v and Imām Muslim v.
(Muqaddamah Sharḥ ul Bukhārī by Nawawī pg. 60)
Firabrī’s v claim that: “There is no narrator of Imām Bukhārī remaining

except me,” is incorrect. It is for this reason that Ḥāfiẓ v said that this
statement was limited to Firabrī’s v knowledge. Otherwise, nine years
later after Firabrī’s v death, Abū Ṭalḥa Manṣūr ibn Muḥammad ibn ʿAlī
ibn Qarībah Al-Bazdawī v died in 329 A.H. He was also a narrator of
Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī as mentioned by Ibn Mākūlā and others. (Hadyus Sārī pg.
491)
69
Apart from Firabrī v and Abū Manṣūr v, the following scholars are also
narrators of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī:
3. Ibrāhīm ibn Maʿqil An-Nasafī Al-Ḥanafī (death: 294 A.H.). However,

he was unable to hear some portions from the end from Imām Bukhārī
v. He would transmit through the medium of ‘ijāzah’ (authorisation).
According to some, he died in 295 A.H. (Dhahabī and Qurshī mention this.)
4. Ḥammād ibn Shākir An-Nasawī (Ḥanafī) has mentioned:
‫ اه‬.‫ أظنه مات في حدود التسعين‬:‫قال الحافظ‬
However, Kawtharī v has mentioned that Nasafī is his correct nisbah

and he died in 311 A.H. (Ibn Majāh aur ʿIlm Ḥadīth pg. 214)
There is also a fifth person: Qāḍī Ḥusayn ibn Ismāʿīl Muḥāmilī v (death:
330 A.H.). According to Kirmānī v, he (Qāḍī Ḥusayn) was the last
person to narrate Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī after hearing it from Imām Bukhārī v.
However, Ḥāfiẓ v refuted this. Ḥāfiẓ v mentioned that he (Qāḍī
Ḥusayn) was only present in some of Imām Bukhārī’s v gatherings
which took place during his final journey to Baghdād. Therefore, in
reality, he did not hear the entire Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī. (Muqaddamah Lāmiʿ pg.
64)
However, from amongst these chains of narrations, only Firabrī’s chain

is famous. Ḥāfiẓ ṣāḥib v clarified this. (Hadyus Sārī pg. 491) In India, Imām
Bukhārī’s v narrations also became well-known through this
(Firabrī’s) chain. (Muqaddamah Lāmiʿ pg. 65, 206)
There are twelve (12) individuals who narrated from Firabrī v 5:
5It is through this famous student of Imām Bukhārī v [i.e., Firabrī] that this
book has reached us. This book became famous through Firabrī’s chain in
India and in the cities of Arabia. Firabrī heard it twice from Imām Bukhārī v.
The names of Firabrī’s students will now be listed. Pay close attention to these
names. In the copy of Bukhārī which we have, there is a special column which
70
1. (Ibn As-Sakkan) Abū ʿAlī Saʿīd ibn ʿUthmān (death: 353 A.H.)
His student is ʿAbdullāh ibn Muḥammad ibn Asad Al-Juhnī.
2. (Al-Mustamlī) Abū Isḥāq Ibrāhīm ibn Aḥmad (death: 376 A.H.)
His students are:
a. Abū Dhar Harawī Mālikī (death: 434 A.H.)
b. ʿAbdur Raḥmān ibn Ḥamdānī (death: 411 A.H.)
3. (Al Akhsīkathī)6 Abū Naṣr Aḥmad ibn Muḥammad (death: 376

A.H.)
His student is Ismāʿīl ibn Isḥāq As-Ṣaffār Az-Zāhid
4. (Abū Zayd) Muḥammad ibn Aḥmad Al-Marwazī Al-Faqīh (death:
371 A.H.)
His students are:
a. ʿAbdullāh Aṣīlī Mālikī (death: 392 A.H.)
b. Abū Nuʿaym Aṣbahānī (death: 430 A.H.)
c. Abul Ḥasan ʿAlī ibn Muḥammad Al-Qābisī Al-Mālikī (death: 403
A.H.).
5. (Ash-Shabbuwī) Abū ʿAlī Muḥammad ibn ʿUmar ibn Shabbuwiyah.
His students are:
a. Saʿīd ibn Aḥmad As-Ṣayrafī Al-ʿAyār
b. The aforementioned ʿAbdur Raḥmān ibn Ḥamdānī
6. (Al-Jurjānī) Abū Aḥmad Muḥammad ibn Muḥammad Al-Jurjānī
(death: 373 A.H. or later)
mentions the variations in different copies. In this column, these names are
mentioned. Therefore, if one remembers this page from “Hadiyyatud Darārī”,
one will have an insight with regards to this. Otherwise, one would have no
idea as to what is being referred to in that column. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
6 This can be read in both ways: with a ‫(ث‬thā) or a ‫(ت‬tā).
Reading it with a ‫ ث‬is preferred as ‫ ث‬is not from amongst the ʿajmī (non-
ʿĀrab) letters.
It is the name of a village in ‫ما وراء النحر‬, (cities of Bukhārā and
Samarkand/Transoxiana- modern day Uzbekistan, Tājikistān, Southern
Kyrgyzstān and southwest Kazakhastān). (Muʿjamul Baldān 1/121) (Muqaddamah
Bukhārī Publisher- Dār Ṭawqun Najāt)
71
His students are:

a. The aforementioned Abū Nuʿaym.
b. The aforementioned Abul Ḥasan ʿAlī ibn Muḥammad Al-Qābisī Al-
Mālikī.
7. (As-Sarakhsī Al-Ḥammuwayyī) 7 Abū Muḥammad ʿAbdullāh ibn
Aḥmad ibn Ḥammuwiyah (death: 381 A.H.)
His students are:
a. The aforementioned Abū Dhar
b. ʿAbdur Raḥmān Dāwūdī (death: 467 A.H.)
8. (Al-Kushmayhanī) Abul Ḥaytham Muḥammad ibn Makkī (death:
389 A.H.)8
His students are:
a. Abū Dhar
b. Karīmah bint Aḥmad (death: 465 A.H.)
c. Muḥammad ibn Aḥmad Al-Ḥafṣī (death: 466 A.H.)
9. (Al Khush-shānī) Ismāʿīl ibn Muḥammad (death: 391 A.H.)
.‫ قاله الحافظ‬،‫آخر من حدث عن الفربرى‬
Ḥāfiẓ v mentions that he was the last to narrate from Firabrī v.
His student is Mustaghfirī (death: 432 A.H.)
Ḥāfiẓ v mentioned the above nine as the students of Firabrī v.
10. Abū Saʿīd Aḥmad ibn Muḥammad

11. Muḥammad ibn Aḥmad ibn Matt
Nawawī v mentioned these two students.
12. (Abū Luqmān) Yaḥyā ibn ʿAmmār Al-Khatlānī Al-Muʿammar.
7It is written like this in “Ḥājatul Qārī” (page 45) with two yā. In “Lāmiʿ” it is
written as Ḥammuwī, with one yā. 12 Fazl
8Al-Kushmayhanī was a village in Marw which, according to Samʿānī, became
deserted. (Al-Jawāhirul Muḍiyyah 2/341)
Kushmayhanī heard from Firabrī v a few months before his death, in 320 A.H.
(Shaykh Zuhayr pg. 35)
72
He lived for one hundred and forty-three (143) years. This was
mentioned in “Al-Yāniʿ Al-Janī fi Asānīd Shaykh ʿAbdul Ghanī”.
Abū Dhar Harwī Mālikī’s v chain is the most famous and strongest
chain as he narrated from Mustamlī v, Sarakhsī v and Kashmīrī v. He
also differentiated and separated between the three. From this, it
becomes known that he memorised it well. (Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar in Fatḥul Bārī
pg. 7 and Muqaddamah Lāmiʿ pg. 28 and 224)
In India, the chain of narration of Dāwūdī from Sarakhsī is more

famous (well-known).
73
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS THE AʾIMMAH MUḤADDITHĪN’S SCHOOL OF THOUGHT
Imām Bukhārī’s v School of Thought
Imām Bukhārī’s v School of Thought
In the introduction of “Fatḥul Bārī”, Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar v did not discuss
this topic (to my knowledge) (‫)فيما أعلم‬1. It is written under one section
of “Fatḥul Bārī” that whatever Imām Bukhārī v quoted with regards to
tafsīr has also been quoted by the ʿulamāʾ of this field like Abū
ʿUbaydah (Maʿmar ibn Muthannā), Naḍr ibn Shumayl and others ‫رحمهم هللا‬.
Majority of the time, he would adopt the opinion of Imām Shāfiʿī, Abū
ʿUbaydah and others ‫ رحمهم هللا‬regarding the discussions and rulings of
fiqh. He would adopt the opinion of Karābisī, Ibn Kilāb and others ‫رحمهم‬
‫ هللا‬with regards to ʿaqīdah issues. (Fatḥul Bārī 2/243 ‫)باب ما يقول عند الخالء‬
However, for a long time there have been discussions regarding the
madhāhib (schools of thought) of the compilers of the Ṣiḥāḥ Sittah.
There are many differences of opinion amongst the scholars regarding
this. The opinions of the scholars with regards to Imām Bukhārī v are
as follows:
ʿAllāmah ibn Taymiyah regards Imām Bukhārī v as an Imām and

mujtahid with regards to fiqh as mentioned by Jazāʾirī Damashqī2 in
“Tawjihun Naẓar” on page 185.
ʿAllāmah Tāj-ud-Dīn Subkī v mentioned in “Ṭabaqāt-ush- Shāfiʿiyyatul

Kubrā” that Imām Bukhārī v was a Shāfiʿī 3. The reason for this opinion
1If anyone claims that he has mentioned it, then they should also mention
where it is mentioned. ‫من ادعي فعليه البيان الي شعبان او الي ما بعد رمضان‬. (Whoever
makes a claim, should also clarify it by Shaʿbān or even after Ramaḍān.) We
have not found this discussion in “Fatḥul Bārī” nor in “Hadyus Sārī”. [Extracted
2This is an amazing book regarding ʿUṣūl Ḥadīth. He is a 14th century scholar.
He passed away in 1338 A.H. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
74
was due to the fact that Imām Bukhārī v was the student of Ḥumaydī v,
and Ḥumaydī v was the student of Imām Shāfiʿī v. It is also said that
Imām Bukhārī v heard from Zaʿfarānī, Abū Thawr and Karābisī, and
they all heard from Imām Shāfiʿī v. (Muqaddamah Lāmiʿ pg. 15-19 and
Maʿārifus Sunan pg. 211)
However, these reasons are not sufficient for Imām Bukhārī v to be a

Shāfiʿī. Otherwise, to say Imām Shāfiʿī v was a Ḥanafī should also be
correct since he was the student of the students of Imām Abū Ḥanīfah
v.4 Similarly, Imām Aḥmad v should also be considered as a Shāfiʿī and
Imām Shāfiʿī v should also be considered as a Mālikī.
Additionally, just as Imām Bukhārī v is a student of Ḥumaydī v, Isḥāq

ibn Rāhwayh v is also his special teacher. Isḥāq ibn Rāhwayh v is a
student of ʿAbdullāh ibn Mubārak v, and ʿAbdullāh ibn Mubārak v5 is a
3 This a very famous book authored by Tāj-ud-Dīn Subkī v. Tāj-ud-Dīn is the

son. His father’s name was Taqī-ud-Dīn Subkī. He wrote “Shifāʾ-us-Siqām fī
Ziyārati Khayril Anām”. This is a book which refutes Ibn Taymiyyah. Both of
them were from Egypt and were great scholars. He was Dhahabī’s v student.
Subkī used this as evidence. However, it is a very weak evidence. In Persian, it
is said, “This evidence is ‫سبك‬.” That is, it is such a weak evidence that it can be
blown away by blowing on it. Although Subkī was a great scholar, sometimes a
great person makes weak statements and sometimes a person of lower rank
makes strong statements. His evidence for Imām Bukhārī v being a Shāfiʿī is
that Bukhārī v is Ḥumaydī’s student and Ḥumaydī is Imām Shāfiʿī’s v student.
However, this evidence will become like scattered dust [i.e., the extreme
weakness of this evidence will be revealed] in the upcoming discussion.
4Imām Shāfiʿī v is Imām Muḥammad’s v student and Imām Muḥammad v is
Imām Abū Ḥanīfah’s v student. Thus, Imām Shāfiʿī v is a Ḥanafī. What reply
can Subkī give regarding this? [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
5ʿAbdullāh ibn Mubārak v was a distinguished personality. Ḥazrat Mawlānā
Ḥabīb-ur-Rahmān ṣāḥib Aʿẓmī v has considered him to the pride of Islām.
Along with being an Imām of Ḥadīth and fiqh, he was also a mujāhid in the
path of Allāh. He also had an important position in Imām Abū Ḥanīfah’s v
Majlis-e-Shūrā. The masāʾil of Imām Abū Ḥanīfah v were recorded in a book
75
student of Imām Abū Ḥanīfah v. Therefore, [from this angle,] Imām

Bukhārī v was a Ḥanafī.
Many teachers of Imām Bukhārī v were Ḥanafī, such as Maʿlā ibn

Manṣūr6, Abū ʿĀṣim Nabīl, Muḥammad ibn ʿAbdullāh Al-Muthannā Al-
Anṣāri and Makkī ibn Ibrāhīm Balkhī (Imām Bukhārī v has narrated
eleven thulāthiyyāt from him.) Apart from these, there are many other
teachers of Imām Bukhārī v who are Ḥanafī. Therefore, the above
evidences are not sufficient.
Similarly, agreeing with Imām Shāfiʿī v in some well-known masāʾil

(rulings) cannot be used as an evidence to prove that he was a Shāfiʿī.
Although he agreed with Imām Shāfiʿī v in certain masāʾil such as: ‘rafaʿ
after consultation with the members of the shurā. Imām Abū Yūsuf v used to
record it in the ʿuṣūl. It is only the Ḥanafī fiqh which has the honour of being
based on a shurā. It is clear that whatever is decided after consultation with
the Imām of Ḥadīth, fiqh and qiyās, will be the most preferred and closest to
the truth than the individual research of a single mujtahid.
6Maʿlā ibn Manṣūr narrated books from Imām Abū Yūsuf v and Imām
Muḥammad v: He narrated both Amālī and Nawādir. Imām Bukhārī v has
narrated from him in books other than Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī. He was also Imām Abū
Ḥanīfah’s v student. Abū ʿĀṣim Dhiḥāk ibn Mukhlid An-Nabīl was also Imām
Aʿẓam’s v student. In Bukhārī, six thulāthiyyāt are narrated from him.
Muḥammad ibn ʿAbdullāh Anṣārī was a student of Imām Abū Yūsuf v and
Imām Zufar v. Imām Bukhārī v has narrated three thulāthiyyāt from him.
Makkī ibn Ibrāhīm is also Imām Aʿẓam’s v student and is a great supporter of
the Ḥanafīs. He had heard both Ḥadīth and fiqh from Imām Aʿẓam v.
(Muqaddamah Lāmiʿ pg.16,17)
Besides them, Yaḥyā Qaṭṭān, Naʿīm ibn Ḥammād Khuzāʿī, Ḥusayn ibn Ibrāhīm,
Ishkāb, ʿUmar ibn Ḥafṣ ibn Ghiyāth, Fuḍayl ibn Ayāḍ, Yaḥyā ibn Maʿīn , Waqīʿ
ibn Al-Jarrāḥ, and many others are the teachers of Imām Bukhārī v and also
the students of Imām Aʿẓam v or they are the students of his students. (Ibid)
76
yadayn’ (‫‘ )رفع يدين‬āmīn bil jahr’ (‫ )آمين بالجهر‬and ‘qirāʿah khalf imām’
(‫)قراءة خلف اإلامام‬, he also disagreed with him and agreed with the
Ḥanafīs7 in many other masāʾil such as:
‫تثليث مسح‬، 11‫جهر بسمله‬،10‫وضوء من مس المرأة‬، 9‫وضوء من مس الذكر‬,8‫وضوء من القبلة‬

14
‫ كالم في الصلوة‬،13‫طهارت مني‬،12‫رأس‬
7 They have counted the masāʾil in which Imām Bukhārī v has differed with
the Ḥanafīs. We have also counted [them]. We have found that the masāʾil in
which Imām Bukhārī v agrees with Imām Abū Ḥanīfah v are more than those
in which he disagrees with him. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
8 ‫[ وضوء من القبلة‬Performing wuḍūʾ due to kissing]: Imām Shāfiʿī v is of the
opinion that wuḍūʾ breaks by kissing a woman. Imām Bukhārī v does not
agree with this. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
9 ‫[ وضوء من مس الذكر‬Performing wuḍūʾ due to touching one’s private part]:
Imām Shāfiʿī v is of the opinion that wuḍūʾ breaks by touching the private
part. Imām Bukhārī v does not agree with this. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
10 ‫[ وضوء من مس المرأة‬Performing wuḍūʾ due to touching a woman]: This ruling
is also as mentioned above. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
11 ‫[ جهر بسمله‬Reading Bismillāh loudly]: Imām Bukhārī v has also not
mentioned regarding reciting Bismillāh loudly. Zaylaʿī has discussed this
extensively and passionately in “Naṣbur Rāʾyah”. He usually, does not express
such passion in his discussions. He usually exhibits such a calm demeanor that
sometimes, he mentions more of the opposition’s evidences than the
evidences of the Aḥnāf. He has not expressed such passion in the entire
“Naṣbur Rāʾyah” as he has done here. His Hanafi pride overflowed regarding
this, and he wrote extensively regarding this and expressed his strong
opposition. If he had found a slight concession regarding this, he would have
brought the evidences. However, Imām Bukhārī v did not mention any
evidence regarding reciting Bismillāh loudly in his Ṣaḥīḥ and he did not
mention this ruling. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]]
12‫[ تثليث مسح رأس‬Making masḥ of the head trice]. Similarly, according to the
Shāfiʿī madh-hab, masḥ of the head must be done thrice. They use the ghayr
maḥfūẓ and shādh narrations of Abū Dāwūd as evidence to support their
opinion and they leave out the ṣaḥīḥ narrations. Even Imām Bukhārī v did not
mention this [doing masaḥ thrice]. Rather, he mentioned a chapter titled: ‫مسح‬
‫[ الرأس مرة‬Masḥ of the head must be done once]. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
77
and many other masāʾil 15. (Muqaddamah Lāmiʿ pg. 61,62)
Therefore, the claim that he was a Shāfiʿī is not based on any solid
evidence.16
13‫مني‬‫[ طهارت‬The purity of semen]: According to the Shāfiʿī madh-hab, semen is

pure. Imām Bukhārī v does not mention this. Rather, he indicates towards its
impurity in the tarjumatul bāb. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
14 ‫[ كالم في الصلوة‬Speaking during ṣalāh]: Similarly, according to the Shawāfiʿ, if
a person speaks a little forgetfully during ṣalāh, his ṣalāh does not become
invalid. Imām Bukhārī v mentions such a Ḥadīth which shows that any type of
speech renders one’s ṣalāh invalid. He mentions Ibn Masʿūd’s z Ḥadīth: ‫ان في‬
‫[ الصلوة لشغال‬Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
15 All of these masāʾil [in which Imām Bukhārī v agrees with the Aḥnāf] are
more than those in which Imām Bukhārī v differs with the Ahnaf. If he can be
considered a Shāfiʿī due to his agreement with Imām Shāfiʿī v in some masāʾil,
then we can say that Imām Bukhārī v has agreed with us more than he has
agreed with Shāfiʿī. Therefore, he is a Ḥanafī. Although we are not in need of
Imām Bukhārī v to support our madh-hab as it is already strong, we mention
this for the purpose of the discussion surrounding the evidence that claims he
was a Shāfiʿī. Thus, by this, we have proven the claim that he is a Shāfiʿī is not
substantiated by any form of solid evidence. Although, there is one opinion
that he is a Shāfiʿī, it is difficult to believe because it is not supported by
evidences. So how, can it be accepted when there is no evidence? Things are
only accepted if they are based on evidences. Have you accepted this claim
[that he was a Shāfiʿī] because Subkī mentions this? Have you simply accepted
it because a great ʿālim made such a claim or are you going to discuss it?
16Shāh Muḥaddith Dehlawī v states in “Al-Inṣāf”: “Although Imām Bukhārī v is
associated with Imām Shāfiʿī v as he is in agreement with many of Shāfiʿī’s
masāʾil, he also has differences with him regarding many other masāʾil.
Therefore, his tafarrudāt cannot be considered to be part of the Shāfiʿī’ school
of thought. (Muqaddamah Lāmiʿ pg. 18)
This exact statement is also mentioned in “Kashf-uẓ-Ẓunūn” by Ḥājī Khalīfah v.

(Muqaddamah Lāmiʿ pg.18)
78
ʿAllāmah Ibn Qayyim v 17 has mentioned in “Aʿlāmul Muwaqqiʿīn” that

Imām Bukhārī, Imām Muslim, Imām Abū Dāwūd, Athram ‫ رحمهم هللا‬and
those from amongst the category of scholars who are the aṣḥāb of
Imām Aḥmad, would follow Imām Aḥmad v more than those
muqallidīn who were strictly muqallids and ascribed themselves to
him. (Muqaddamah Lāmiʿ pg.18, 69)
Ibn Abī Laylā v also considered these three (Imām Bukhārī, Imām
Muslim and Imām Abū Dāwūd ‫ )رحمهم هللا‬to be from amongst the
Ḥanābilah. (Ibid)
Nawāb Siddīq Ḥasan Khān18 in “Abjād ul ʿUlūm” considers Imām

Bukhārī, Abū Dāwūd and Nasāʾī ‫ رحمهم هللا‬to be from amongst the Shawāfiʿ.
ʿAllāmah Nafīs-ud-Dīn ʿUlwā v refuted Subkī and agreed that Imām

Bukhārīvwas a mustaqil mujtahid.
ʿAllāmah Anwar Shāh Kashmīrī v has also agreed, without any

uncertainty, that Imām Bukhārī v was a mujtahid. (Fayḍul Bārī pg.58,
Maʿārifus Sunan pg. 21)
Mawlānā Muḥammad ʿAbdur Rashīd Nuʿmānī v mentioned in “Mā

tamassu ilayhil Ḥājah” that like the other authors of the Ṣiḥāḥ Sittah,
Imām Bukhārī v and Imām Abū Dāwūd v were not followers of any
Imām nor were they muṭlaq mujtahids. However, they were inclined
17ʿAllāmah ibn Qayyim v is Ibn Taymiyyah’s v student. There is a lot of debate

surrounding the name of this book. Shaykh ʿAbdul Fattāḥ Abū Ghuddah v has
discussed this in the footnotes of Muqaddamah of “Iʿlāʾ-us Sunan”. One of his
conclusions is that its title is: “Eʿlāmul Muwaqqiʿīn”. This is one of his best
books. The other interpretation is that it is titled: “Aʿlāmul Muwaqqiʿīn”.
18This is famous Indian ghayr muqallid scholar. He was not a Nawāb himself.
Rather, he married a woman who was a Nawāb. Thus, he became a Nawāb.
There were many debates and discussions between him and Mawlānā ʿAbdul
Ḥay Ṣāḥib. Both of them were from the same era. He refutes him a lot in “Al
Fawāʾid-ul-Jahmiyyah”. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
79
towards the opinions of the aʾimmah. If they were mustaqil mujtahids,

like the other mujtahid scholars, their opinions would also have been
documented in books. However, this has not been found. For example,
Imām Tirmidhī v, who is one of the notable students of Imām Bukhārī
v, in his Jāmiʿ Tirmidhī, he mentioned the opinions of the mujtahidīn
scholars. He has even mentioned the opinions of ʿAbdullāh ibn
Mubārak v and Isḥāq ibn Rāhwayh v, but he did not mention the
opinion of Imām Bukhārī v. This shows that Imām Bukhārī v was not a
mujtahid.19 (Mā Tamassu ilayhil Ḥājah pg. 27)
If it is accepted that they were muṭlaq mujtahids after the aʾimmah

arbaʿah, then according to the research of Shaykh-ul-Ḥadīth Mawlānā
Muḥammad Zakarriyā v, Imām Bukhārī v was a mustaqil mujtahid.
There are many differences of opinions regarding this matter. He was
definitely not a Shafiʿī as he also made objections against the Shāfiʿī
madh-hab just as he did against the Aḥnāf madh-hab. However, his
tone was a bit harsher in his objections against the Aḥnāf. This fact will
become apparent to those who are aware of the differences of the
scholars’ opinion if they study and ponder upon the tarājim (chapter
titles) of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī.
His opinions were not documented like that of the aʾimmah mujtahidīn,
because he was not an Imām who was followed like the other Imāms
who were followed. It is for this reason, his madh-hab never became
famous. (Muqaddamah Lāmiʿ pg. 19. Pg. 17,60 of the typed edition)
In our opinion, it is difficult to consider Imām Bukhārī v as a muṭlaq,

mustaqil (i.e., an independent) mujtahid like the aʾimmah arbaʿah
Mawlānā Nuʿmānī v has refuted those that are of the opinion that he was a
19
muṭlaq mujtahid like Ibn Taymiyyah, ʿAllāmah Nafīs-ud-Dīn and Kashmīrī ‫رحمهم‬
‫هللا‬.
This is the world of knowledge. A person does not bow his head simply by
seeing the face of a person. Rather, each person’s opinion is weighed against
their evidences. Whichever opinion balances the scale, that opinion is
accepted. This is the method of debating. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
80
because he does not have any uṣūls (principles)20. In Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī,

there are many places in which his opinion is not clear and obvious.
Perhaps, it is for this reason, his statements and opinions are not
mentioned in books. Apart from Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī, we do not know of any
other book by Imām Bukhārī v which gives details regarding juziʾyāt
(subsidiary masāʾil). How can he attain this status, when his students
did not consider him to be a faqīh or a mujtahid? Undoubtedly, he is a
special type of mujtahid like the other muḥaddithīn who compiled
Ḥadīth books. From amongst the tarājim of the Ḥadīth books, the
tarājim abwāb of Imām Bukhārī v are the most profound, deep and
insightful. From this, it is understood that in comparison with the other
muḥaddithīn, his insight was deeper and he possessed a greater
intellectual capability to derive proofs from texts. Perhaps, it is for this
reason that many scholars called Imām Bukhārī v a mujtahid.21 And
Allāh l knows best.
Supplement
On this occasion, it will be befitting to mention the statements of the

scholars concerning the school of thought of the other compilers of the
Ṣiḥāḥ Sittah because discussions regarding the compilers of Ṣiḥāḥ
Sittah are usually mentioned together.
Imām Muslim v
20Every muṭlaq mujtahid has some uṣūls from which furūʿ masāʾil can be
derived. Imām Bukhārī v does not have any fiqh books. [Extracted from Ifādātush
Shaykh]
21Scholars like Ibn Taymiyyah, ʿAllāmah Nafīs-ud-Dīn and Kashmīrī ‫رحمهم هللا‬.
Similarly, Shaykh-ul-Ḥadīth Mawlānā Muḥammad Zakarriyā v and other
scholars who considered him a mustaqil mujtahid do not mean he was a
mujtahid like that of the aʾimmah arbaʿah. Rather, they meant that he was a
mujtahid from the angle that he derived rulings from aḥādīth. This is our
opinion. However, we do not claim that this is the correct opinion. Rather, we
say that Allāh l knows best. Additionally, you are also not compelled to accept
this opinion. Rather, you can form your own opinion. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
81
ʿAllāmah Kashmīrī v has stated that he does not know the madh-hab of
Imām Muslim v with certainty because he himself did not write the
tarājim in his book. [Therefore, one cannot deduce his madh-hab by
studying his tarājim.] (Fayḍul Bārī pg. 58 and ʿUrf-ush-Shadhī with Tirmidhī pg. 1)
Nawāb Ṣiddiq Ḥasan Khān ṣāḥib v mentioned in both of his books, “Al
Ḥaṭṭah Bi Dhikr Ṣiḥāḥ Sittah” and “Itḥāf An-Nubalāʾ” that Imām Muslim
v was a Shāfiʿī. (Muqaddamah Lāmiʿ pg. 18 and 68)
ʿAllāmah Ibrāhīm Tahtuhwī v22 mentions that it is famous that he was a

Shāfiʿī from the angle that his ijtihād coincided with Imām Shāfiʿī’s v
ijtihād and not from the angle that he was a muqallid of Imām Shāfiʿī v.
He also states that it is indicated in “Itḥāful Akābir”, that he was of the
Mālikī madh-hab. From the “Taqrīb” of Ibn Ḥajar v, it becomes known
that Imām Muslim v was a mujtahid. (Muqaddamah Lāmiʿ pg. 18 and 68)
Mawlānā ʿAbdul Rashīd Nuʿmānī’s v opinion has been mentioned

above. According to him, Imām Muslim v was neither a muqallid nor a
mujtahid muṭlaq23.
Shāh Walīullāh Muḥaddith Dehlawīv has considered Imām Muslim v as

a Shāfiʿī. (Al -Inṣāf fī Bayān Sababul Ikhtilāf pg. 57)
It is also mentioned in “Kashfuẓ Ẓunūn”24 that he was as Shāfiʿī. 1/555

(Muqaddamah Lāmiʿ pg. 19 and 70)
22This is a place in Sindh (India) called Tahtah. In Arabic, it is called Tatah.

This province in Sindh is very famous. Many giant scholars visited this place.
We also take this opinion of Mawlānā Nuʿmānī v; i.e, from one angle he is a
23
mujtahid. That is, he is a mujtahid in deriving rulings from aḥādīth. [Extracted from
Ifādātush Shaykh]
24The author of this book is Ḥājī Khalīfah v also known as Mullā Kātib Chalpī
(death: 1067 A.H.). This is an amazing book. The full name of this book is:
“Kashf-uẓ-Ẓunūn ʿan asāmī kutubul funūn”. Two appendices have been
written on this book:
82
ʿAllāmah Ibn Qayyim v also ascribed him to the Ḥanbalī madh-hab just
as he ascribed Imām Bukhārī v to the Ḥanbalī madh-hab. (Muqaddamah
Lāmiʿ pg. 18)
ʿAllāmah Ibn Taymiyyah v ascribed him to the madh-hab of the Ahl

Ḥadīth. He did not consider him to be a muqallid nor mujtahid. Rather,
he was inclined towards the statements and opinions of the aʾimmah of
Ḥadīth such as: Shāfiʿī, Aḥmad, Isḥāq, Abū ʿUbaydah and others ‫رحمهم هللا‬.
According to Mawlānā Muḥammad Zakariyyā v, apart from Imām

Bukhārī v and Imām Abū Dāwūd v, the authors of the other books of
Ḥadīth are in the category of mujtahidīn fil madh-hab. They agree with
their Imām on some issues and disagree with regards to others. It is for
this reason, there are many differences of opinion regarding this.
(Muqaddamah Lāmiʿ pg. 17, 19)
A mujtahid fil madh-hab is such a person who follows a mujtahid

muṭlaq mustaqil Imām in the ʿuṣūl (foundational principles) but not in
the furūʿ (subsidiary rulings). 25 When someone is deemed as a
mujtahid of a madh-hab, it must also be mentioned of which madh-hab
and of which Imām. This has not been mentioned in the statement of
Ḥazrat Shaykh.
We think that the statements of Ibn Taymiyyah v and Mawlānā

Nuʿmānī v are more appropriate, i.e., these authors of aḥādīth derive
rulings from the aḥādīth themselves. Sometimes, they agree with an
Imām mujtahid and at other times with another mujtahid. This is what
is meant by Shaykh Zakariyyā’s v statement of mujtahid fil madh-hab,
‫ هدية العارفين أسماء المؤلفين وآثار المصنفين من كشف‬and ‫إيضاح المكنون في الذيل على كشف الظنون‬
.‫ مقدمةكشف الظنون‬،‫ه‬١٣٣٩‫الظنون للشيخ باشا بغدادي مولدا نزيل في قرية قرى قسطنطنية م‬
In total, there are six volumes. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
25This is the definition of mujtahid fil madhhab which has been mentioned in
the fiqh books. ʿAllāmah Kamāl Pāshā v mentioned seven categories of
fuqahāʾ, which are mentioned in “Shāmī”. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
83
i.e., these people are between being muqallids and mujtahid muṭlaqs.
That is, he is a type of mujtahid (as we have stated). The definition of
mujtahid fil madhhab in fiqh is not what is meant by Ḥazrat Shaykh.
And Allāh l knows best.
Imām Tirmidhī v
According to ʿAllāmah Kashmīrī v, Imām Tirmidhī v was a Shāfiʿī. The
only ruling in which he has a different opinion (from Imām Shāfiʿī) is
regarding ‘ibrāduẓ Ẓuhr’ (‫)إبرادالظهر‬.
According to ʿAllāmah Ibrāhīm Tahtuhwī, Imām Tirmidhī v is a
mujtahid. His fiqh coincides with Imām Shāfiʿī’s v fiqh.
According to Shāh Walīullāh Muḥaddith Dehlawī v, Imām Abū Dāwūd
v and Imām Tirmidhī v are mujtahids. However, they have also been
ascribed to Imām Aḥmad v and Imām Isḥāq v.
ʿAllāmah Ibn Taymiyyah considers him to be from the madh-hab of the
Ahl Ḥadīth; he is neither a mujtahid nor a muqallid. Rather, he is
inclined towards the (opinions of the) Ahl al-Ḥadīth.26
26Imām Tirmidhī v has frequently mentioned “‫”عند أصحابنا‬. This supports Ibn
Taymiyyah’s opinion (that Imām Tirmidhī is of the Ahl al-Ḥadīth madh-hab.
The way of the muḥaddithīn is such, when a Ḥadīth reaches them, they use it
to derive their own rulings).
After mentioning ‘‫’عند أصحابنا‬, he sometimes mentions Imām Shāfiʿī v and Imām
Aḥmad v after a ḥurf aṭf (the conjunction ‘and’) and sometimes without a ḥurf
aṭf. From this it can be deduced that he was of a different group (madh-hab)
from them, yet at the same time, he also had some form of connection with
them. (When it is without the conjunction, it becomes known that Imām
Aḥmad v and Imām Shāfiʿī v are his ‫أصحاب‬. And when there is a conjunction,
which is there for mughayarah, then it becomes known that his ‫ أصحاب‬are
other than them. In comparison to the people of ʿIrāq he has a stronger
connection with the people of Madīnah. From the people of Baghdād, he is
only connected to Imām Aḥmad v. And he is hardly connected to the
remainder of the Aḥnāf). And Allāh knows best.
84
According to Mawlānā ʿAbdul Rashīd Nuʿmānī v, he is neither a

mujtahid nor is he a muqallid. He is inclined towards the opinions of
his aʾimmah as mentioned previously.
Shaykh Muḥammad Zakariyyā v places him in the category of the
mujtahids as mentioned previously. (Muqaddamah Lāmiʿ pg. 19, 67, 71)
Imām Abū Dāwūd v
According to ʿAllāmah Kashmīrī v and Shaykh Zakariyyā v, he was a

Ḥanbalī.
According to Nawāb Ṣiddiq Ḥasan Khān v, he was a Shāfiʿī.
According to Shāh Walīullāh v he was a mujtahid and was ascribed to

Isḥāq v, similar to Imām Tirmidhī v (as mentioned previously).
According to ʿAllāmah Ibn Taymiyah v, he was of the madh-hab of the

Ahl Ḥadīth (as mentioned previously). (Muqaddamah Lāmiʿ pg. 18)
Imām Nasāʾī v
According to ʿAllāmah Kashmīrī v,, he was a Ḥanbalī.
According to Shāh ʿAbdul ʿAzīz v and Nawāb Ṣiddiq Ḥasan Khān v, he

was a Shāfiʿī.
According to Mawlānā Muḥammad Zakariyyā v, he was a mujtahid of

the madh-hab (as mentioned previously).

Ahl Ḥadīth.
Imām Ibn Mājah v

Ahl al-Ḥadīth.
85
According to Shāh Walīullāh v, he was a mujtahid and he also ascribed

him to Imām Aḥmad v and Imām Isḥāq v.
According to Mawlānā Nuʿmānī v, he was neither a mujtahid nor a
muqallid. Rather, he was inclined to the opinion of his scholars.
According to Shaykh Muḥammad Zakariyyā v he was a mujtahid of the

madh-hab. (Muqaddamah Lāmiʿ pg. 19, 67, 71)
According to ʿAllāmah Kashmīrī v his madh-hab is not known. (Fayḍul

Bārī pg. 58)
Perhaps, he was a Shāfiʿī .27 (Al-ʿUrf-ush-Shadhī pg. 1)
27His madh-hab is not known. It is possible, i.e., it is not known with certainty,
that he was a Shāfiʿī. However, we adopt the same opinion regarding him
which we adopt regarding all of them. That is, they were of the Ahl al-Ḥadīth
madh-hab. They were not mujtahid muṭlaq mustaqil. Rather, they were a type
of mujtahid. However, from amongst them, Imām Bukhārī v holds the highest
position. It is for this reason, it is said about Imām Bukhārī v: “His fiqh is
within his tarājim.” There are two explanations for this:
1. His madh-hab cannot be found elsewhere; it can only be found from his
tarājim.
2. The sharpness, intelligence and excellence of Imām Bukhārī v is hidden
within his tarājim. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
86
87
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS IMĀM BUKHĀRĪ AND THE AḤNĀF
Imām Bukhārī v And The Aḥnāf
Imām Bukhārī v had the opportunity to be the student of Abū Ḥafṣ

Kabīr v (death: 271 A.H.) as mentioned previously. From him, he heard
the “Jāmiʿ” of Sufyān Thawrī in his hometown before travelling. A
friendly connection existed between Imām Bukhārī’s v father and Abū
Ḥafṣ Kabīr v. After the passing of Ismāʿīl, Abū Ḥafṣ Kabīr v would
continuously assist Imām Bukhārī v. For a long time, Abū Ḥafṣ Aḥmad
Kabīr’s son (Muḥammad Abū Ḥafṣ Ṣaghīr) and Imām Bukhārī v
travelled together to seek knowledge. Abū Ḥafṣ Kabīr v was the
student of Imām Abū Yūsuf v and Imām Muḥammad v. He was
considered as one of the senior students of Imām Muḥammad v. He
was of the same age as Imām Shāfiʿī v. He was granted a long life and
also lived for a short period after the death of Imām Shāfiʿī v. He was a
great muḥaddith, faqīh, devout worshipper and ascetic. Countless
people have heard from him. This father and son were famous Imāms
of Ḥadīth in Bukārā. It is clear that because of the connection he had
with them, Imām Bukhārī v remained very close to the Aḥnāf.
Later on, when Imām Bukhārī v built a connection with the student of
Imām Shāfiʿī v, Imām Ḥumaydī v, and Nuʿaym ibn Ḥammād Khuzāʿī v,
Imām Bukhārī v changed because these two opposed the Aḥnāf
considerably.
88
Ḥumaydī
Abū Nuʿaym narrated this statement of Ḥumaydī along with its chain in
“Ḥilyatul Awliyāʾ” (9/96):
.‫نرد َّ على أصحاب الرأى فلم نُح ِسن كيف نُردِّ عليهم حت ِّى جا َءنا الشافعى ففتح لنا‬
ُ ‫كنِّا نريدُ ان‬
(Mā Tamassu ilayhil Ḥājah pg. 20)
“We wished to refute the Aṣḥābur Rāʾy. However, we could not do this
properly until Imām Shāfiʿī came and opened it up for us (i.e., made it
easy for us).”
This was the extent of Ḥumaydī’s knowledge. Despite this, he also said:
“When I accompanied Imām Shāfiʿī v on a journey to Baṣrah, I used to
find out masāʾil from him and he used to acquire Ḥadīth from me.” (Mā
Tamassu ilayhil Ḥājah pg. 20)
The author of “Anwārul Bārī”1 has written that Ḥumaydī spent an

ample amount of time in the service of Sufyān bin ʿUyaynah v (the
1 The author of “Anwār Al-Bārī” is ʿAllāmah Syed Aḥmad Raḍa Bijnorī v. Bijnor
is a district in the west of Uttar Pradesh. We are from the east. He is the son-
in-law and student of ʿAllāmah Kashmīrī v. Both him and Mawlānā Yūsuf
Binnorī v went to Qāhirah (Cairo) on behalf of Majlis ʿIlmī to print “Naṣbur
Rāʾyah” and “Fayḍul Bārī”. ʿAllāmah Syed Aḥmad Raḍa Bijnorī v is a
distinguished scholar. I would frequently write letters to him (during my stay
in Dabhel). It was his wish that a Takhaṣṣuṣ Fil Ḥadīth Department be
established in Dabhel. Dabhel is home to a very famous madrasah of Gujarat.
Many great and exceptional scholars are affiliated with this institution.
The preparations for establishing this department were ongoing. I was the
intermediary between the principal of Dabhel and ʿAllāmah Syed Aḥmad Raḍa
Bijnorī v. It was confirmed that Shaykhul Hind, Muḥaddith Kabīr, ʿAllāmah
Jalīl, would come to Dabhel for a few months during the year and establish the
Takhaṣṣuṣ Fil Ḥadīth Department. The syllabus was prepared. It was his wish
that the outstanding students of the Dārul ʿUlūm study Takhaṣṣuṣ Fil Ḥadīth.
89
They should study ʿUṣūl Ḥadīth and jarḥ and taʿdīl so that they can refute the
ghayr muqallidīn. At that time, the expert in this field in India was none other
than Amīrul Hind. It is for this reason that he was selected to be the head of
this department. However, the establishment of this department in Dabhel did
not materialise. We returned to South Africa and thus, regrettably, this dream
was not fulfilled.
Thereafter, by the will of Allāh l, this department was established in

Sahāranpūr. The head of this department was also an Aʿẓm̄ī, the well-known
Mawlānā Zaynul ʿĀbidīn Aʿẓm̄ī Purah Maʿrūf. This department was also
established in Deoband. Mawlānā Niʿmatulāh ṣāḥib and Mawlānā ʿAbdullāh
Purah Maʿrūf were the head of the department there. Purah Maʿrūf is a town
near Mawnath Bhanjan. Many ʿulamāʾ were also from here and there was also
a madrasah here. These two great madrasahs established this department.
A book has also been published on this topic. It was compiled by Mawlānā
Shāhid ṣāḥib Sahāranpūrī who was the grandson of Ḥazrat Shaykh. An
interesting point is that the fuḍalāʾ of Maẓāhirul ʿUlūm have offered their
services in the field of Ḥadīth more than those of Deoband. For instance:
“Badhlul Majhūd” and “Iʿlāʾ-us Sunan”. Additionally, Shaykh Muḥammad
Zakariyyā’s v books (Awjazul Masālik, Lāmiʿ Darārī, Kawkabud Durrī) are all
compiled by the ʿulamāʾ of Maẓāhirul ʿUlūm. Those that are aware of the
history of Maẓāhirul ʿUlūm and its education system, are aware of the fact that
from the very beginning, the original objective and main goal of the founders
and akābir (senior scholars) of Maẓāhirul ʿUlūm was to spread the knowledge
of the Qurʾān and aḥādīth. Even today, after the passing of over a century, this
institution adopts this methodology. The advice and words of wisdom of its
first principal and founder, Ḥazrat Mawlānā Rashīd Aḥmad ṣāḥib Gangohī v
reflects the original goal [of this institution]. His statement is recorded on the
pages of history in the following words: “It is necessary on the principal of the
madrasah to ensure that the students study and ponder deeply on Ḥadīth and
fiqh. The study of this is the original purpose of establishing madāris. The
other fields surround and support this. This should also be the purpose of the
teachers (of Maẓāhirul ʿUlūm); that they ensure to encourage the students to
pay attention in the dars (class). Additionally, during their dīni discourses,
they should always encourage students to study and research with full
90
student of Imām Abū Ḥanīfah v). Thus, he was very knowledgeable

regarding the aḥādīth of Sufyān v and he was honoured because of this.
It is for this reason that Imām Shāfiʿī v respected him and took him on
some of his journeys. Due to his obstinate disposition, he became a
cause for the splitting up of his own group. He wanted to become the
deputy of Imām Shāfiʿī v. However, he was not very proficient in fiqh.
He did not gain success, so he meaninglessly created disarray. He was
also deficient with regards to his knowledge in fiqh in comparison to
other students of Imām Shāfiʿī v. Muḥammad ibn Ḥakam (the student
of Imām Shāfiʿī v) has considered Ḥumaydī a liar. (Muqaddamah Anwārul
Bārī 2/28)
Imām Bukhārī v narrated the following from Ḥumaydī v in his “Tārīkh

Ṣaghīr” on pg. 158 (the edition which was published in Illahabad):
Ḥumaydī v mentioned that Abū Ḥanīfah v said: “When I came to

Makkah Mukarrammah, I learnt three sunan from a barber: When I sat
in front of him, he told me to sit facing towards the qiblah. He then
started from the right side of my head and stopped until he reached
both the bones.”
Ḥumaydī v said that a person who does not have the knowledge of the
of the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allāh n and the practice of the
Ṣaḥābahgwith regards to the rituals of ḥajj, then how can such a
concentration and understanding and that they should also pay great
attention to the fields of dīn, especially the field of Ḥadīth.
‫وانا الراجي رحمة ربي‬

[And I hope for the mercy of my Lord.]
Rashīd Aḥmad Gangohī
‫عفي عنه‬
[May he be forgiven.]
91
person be followed with regards to inheritance, zakāh, ṣalāh and other

Islāmic injunctions? Imām Bukhārī v mentions this without refuting it
which indicates that he agrees with this statement.
ʿAllāmah Kashmīrī v said: “In his Ṣāḥīḥ, Imām Bukhārī v speaks with a
soft tone. Otherwise, he speaks with a harsh tone. What is this? See
“Juzʾ Qirāʾah Khalf Imām”, “Juzʾ Rafaʿ Yadayn” and other than this.”
(Muqaddamah Anwārul Bārī 2/26,36)
Shaykh Muḥammad Zakariyyā Khandelwī v states: “Even in his Ṣāḥīḥ,

he would refute them (the Aḥnāf) in a harsh tone without explicitly
mentioning their names. He did not refute others in such a harsh
tone.”2 (Muqaddamah Lāmiʿ pg. 15, 60)
In reply to the narration of Ḥumaydī v, ʿAllāmah Muḥammad Zāhid

Kawtharī v 3 stated: “Firstly, Ḥumaydī could not have heard this
2 Who is this ‫“( بعض الناس‬some people have stated”) referring to which Imām
Bukhārī v mentions in various places? This is his refutation of Imām Abū
Ḥanīfah v. In many places, he tries to outline deficiencies in Imām Abū
Ḥanīfah’s v opinions and statements. This sharp and harsh criticism is found
in Ṣāḥīḥ Bukhārī and also in his juzʾ. We will discuss the details and contents
of this juzʾ later. The publishers have named this juzʾ on rafaʿ yadayn as
“Qurratul ʿAynayn”. The juzʾ titled, “Juzʾ Qirāʿah Khalf ʾImām” was published
by the Ḥanafīs of Madīnah who are from Bukhārā. They have a publisher
named Maktabatul ʾImān. This risālah (treatise) has been published there.
They have titled it, “Aḥsanul Kalām”. Muḥammad Zakariyyā v has considered
it ṣāḥīḥ (authentic). In these editions, no name has been mentioned. However,
based on the context, who else can it be referring to other than Imām Abū
Ḥanīfah v? Who is of the opinion that the period for breastfeeding is two and a
half (2 ½) years? It is none other than Imām Abū Ḥanīfah v. There are a few
other indications present by which the one who is being indicated towards
becomes known. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
3He passed away in 1371 A.H. He wrote “Tāʿnībul Khaṭīb”. In this book, he
refutes Khaṭīb Baghdādi’s 13-volume book regarding criticism and opposition
towards Imām Abū Ḥanīfah v.
92
statement directly from Imām Abū Ḥanīfah as he was of a later era.

Ḥumaydī’s death was in 219 A.H.4Thus, there must be a connecting link
in the chain between him and Imām Abū Ḥanīfah v. However, the
missing link is unknown. Imām Bukhārī v did not deem it necessary to
use an authentic chain to criticise and lower the status of Imām Abū
Ḥanīfah v. How can one place such reliance on such a criticism
especially when Ḥumaydī’s prejudice [towards Imām Abū Ḥanīfah] )is
clearly known? (Muqaddamah Anwārul Bārī 2/23)
Secondly, even if the narration is considered to be authentic,

Ḥumaydī’s deduction is inaccurate. This is because it is possible that
this was the first ḥajj of Imām Abū Ḥanīfah v which he performed
during his childhood. Therefore, this does not necessitate that he did
not know these masāʾil later in his life. Rather, Imām Abū Ḥanīfah’s v
virtue becomes apparent from this; that he had such a great zeal for
knowledge and the Sunnah to the extent that he benefitted from a
barber and remembered what he said (and a person with such great
zeal becomes a great scholar). (See Ar-Rafaʿ wat Takmīl - Imām Luckhnawī’s
footnotes pg. 396)
Additionally, many ʿulamāʾ consider the masāʾil of ḥajj to be intricate.

Making errors and mistakes the first time, has also been narrated from
many other great ʿulamāʾ. Ḥumaydī’s deduction gives an insight into
his inner desires and thoughts. ‫ فا لى هللا المشتكي‬-To Allāh, we complain
alone.
Kawtharī was a strong and firm Ḥanafī. He was from Turkey. He resided in
Cairo, Egypt towards the end of his life. He was such a great scholar that he
was offered to be appointed as the Shaykh of Al-Azhar. This is a very
honourable position to be given in Egypt. However, he did not accept this
offer. He was an expert in manuscripts, let alone the publishing of books. He
gave a very composed yet strong reply. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
4 Imām Abū Ḥanīfah v passed away in 150 A.H. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
93
Nuʿaym
The second person is Nuʿaym ibn Ḥammād v. Dhahabī v has written in

“Tadhkiratul Ḥuffāẓ” that although he was an Imām, he was munkarul
Ḥadīth.5 Dolābī v said: “Nasāʾī v considered him weak. Someone else
said: “He fabricated aḥādīth to strengthen the Sunnah and he made up
tales in order to place Imām Abū Ḥanīfah v in a negative light.” Abul
Fatḥ Azdī v mentioned this with the word ‘‫’قالوا‬, i.e., the people have
said that he did such and such.
Ḥāfiẓ v did his best to remove this jarḥ (criticism - grading as

unreliable) from Nuʿaym because Imām Bukhārī v mentions his
narrations in a few places and he also mentions him in the taʿlīqāt.
Imām Muslim v also narrates from him in one place in the
introduction. Before Ḥāfiẓ v, Ibn ʿAdī v also refuted and objected
against Dolābī’s jarḥ. He [i.e., Ibn ʿAdī] states that Dolābī v was a
supporter of the Ahl Rāʾy. Due to this, he erred in his accusation against
Nuʿaym. (He mentioned this criticism because Nuʿaym usually opposes
the Ahl Rāʾy). However, Ḥāfiẓ v said that Ibn ʿAdī v accused Dolābī,
whereas he is free from it (the accusation). The accusation is on his
Shaykh as he is majhūl (unknown). Similarly, the jarḥ of Azdī is also
unreliable because the fāʿil (speaker) of ‫ قالوا‬is unknown.
In short, Ibn ʿAdī v and Ḥāfiẓ ibn Ḥajar v differed and contradicted
each other in their refutation of the criticism against Nuʿaym. (See
Tahdhīb-ut-Tahdhīb 1/462) ‫ و‬6.‫اذا تعارضا تساقطا‬-When both contradict each
other, both are discarded.
5 Imām Bukhārī v also changed by staying in his company. [Extracted from Ifādātush
Shaykh]
6When both of them contradict each other, we will say: “‫اذا تعارضا تساقطا‬.”
Thus, neither Ibn ʿAdī’s v nor Ibn Ḥajar’s v view is correct and this criticism
remains in its place. Therefore, Nuʿaym is majrūḥ (criticized-unreliable).
94
Mawlānā ʿAbdur Rashīd Nuʿmānī v said: “Azdī and Dolābī are amongst
the scholars of jarḥ and taʿdīl (grading narrators as reliable or
unreliable). They transmit jarḥ from their scholars. This excuse of Ḥāfiẓ
v cannot remove the jarḥ against Nuʿaym. Perhaps, it was as though
Ḥāfiẓ v never heard Nuʿaym’s fabrications against Imām Abū Ḥanīfah
v. It is for this reason that he presented these excuses.” (Mā Tamassu
ilayhil Ḥājah pg. 20)
In his “Tārīkh Ṣaghīr”, on page 174, Imām Bukhārī v narrates from this
very same Nuʿaym that Fazārī said: “I was sitting with Sufyān (perhaps,
it was Thawrī) when he received the news of the death of Imām Abū
Ḥanīfah. Sufyān said: “Alḥamdulillāh, he was destroying the gatherings
of Islām. No one more wretched than him has been born.” (Meaning, he
has passed away. That is good, ‫العياذ باهلل‬-Allāh forbid.)
In the book of Imām Bukhārī v titled “Ḍuʿafāʾ Kabīr”, Imām Bukhārī v

narrated a few narrations from Nuʿaym which were in criticism of
Imām Abū Ḥanīfah v.
The ʿulamāʾ prevented us from following Imām Bukhārī v in this

regard. Ḥāfiẓ Sakhāwī v mentions in “Al-Iʿlān bit Tawbīkh” on page 65
that some scholars have criticized some of the aʾimmah matbuʿīn in
their books. Sakhāwī v then listed the names of some of these scholars
and their books. They are as follows: Ḥāfiẓ Abū Shaykh Ibn Ḥibbān v in
his book “As-Sunnah”, Abū Aḥmad Ibn ʿAdī v in “Al-Kāmil”, Ḥāfiẓ Abū
Bakr Khaṭīb v in “Tārīkh Baghdād” and also some scholars before them
such as Ibn Abī Shaybah v in his “Muṣannaf” as well as Imām Bukhārī v
and Imām Nasāʾī v. Sakhāwī v further mentions that it is appropriate
to refrain from following these scholars in this regard [i.e., in criticizing
the aʾimmah matbuʿīn].7 (Mā Tamassu ilayhil Ḥājah pg. 20)
7 There should be no criticism against the aʾimmah matbūʿīn. Subkī v has

written a treatise regarding this. Shaykh ʿAbdul Fattāḥ v edited and published
it. This has been discussed with great passion and details in this treatise.
95
This is Sakhāwī’s v opinion. However, his teacher defends Nuʿaym in

order to support Imām Bukhārī’s v opinion. However, it is known from
the word ‫ قالوا‬that many of Azdī’s teachers also said this regarding
Nuʿaym. Imām Nasāʾī v regards Nuʿaym as ḍaʿīf (weak). However,
Imām Bukhārī v also mentioned his narrations in his book, “Ṣāḥīḥ al-
Bukhārī”.8
Ismāʿīl Ibn ʿArʿarah
The third person is Ismāʿīl ibn ʿArʿarah. His qualities and

characteristics are completely unknown. There is no mention of any of
his narrations in the Ṣiḥāḥ Sittah. (Hadyus Sārī pg. 447)
Similarly, ʿAllamāh Ibn ʿAbdil Barr Mālikī v has mentioned this in “Jāmiʿ
Bayānul ʿIlm wa Faḍlihi”. Criticising the aʾimmah matbūʿīn is like spitting on
the sun; the spit returns on one’s mouth and does not go on the sun. Or it [i.e.,
criticizing the aʾimmah matbūʿīn] is like a person who crashes his horns into a
mountain. To such a person it is said:
‫اشفق علي الراس وَل تشفق علي الجبل‬ ‫يا ناطح الجبل العالي ليكلمه‬
O the one who is going to crash the mountain with his horns! Have mercy on
your own head and not on the mountain.
The mountain will not crumble by your horns. Rather, it is your horns that will
break.
This principle has been written in uṣūl-Ḥadīth under the topic of jarḥ and
taʿdīl. However, these principles are neglected when it comes to Imām Abū
Ḥanīfahv. This is indeed oppressive. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
8 Many narrators of Ṣāḥīḥ al-Bukhārī are also mutakallam fīhī. Our teacher’s
teacher, Mawlānā ʿAbdul Ghaffār ṣāḥib Mawwī Naqshbandī has written a book
titled, “‫”الجام المتغنتين‬. It has been published in “Al Ma-āthir” which is a magazine
which has been published in our city in memory of Mawlānā Aʿẓmī v. In that
magazine, this book has been published. In that book, many narrators of
Bukhārī and Muslim, who have been criticized greatly, have been discussed.
Therefore, one should not think that all the narrators of Bukhārī and Muslim
are angels. This is not so. However, despite this, undoubtedly, their narrations
are ṣāḥīḥ. This will be discussed later. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
96
Additionally, there is no mention of his narrations in Imām Bukhārī’s v

“Tārīkh”. Imām Bukhārī v in his “Tārīkh Ṣaghīr”, mentioned the
following one narration from him: Imām Abū Ḥanīfah v said: “One of
the women from the tribe of Jaham came by us and became the teacher
of our women.”
This Ibn ʿArʿarah is from the era after (Imām Bukhārī). Therefore,
there is a break in this narration. How has Imām Bukhārī v remained
silent after transmitting such a narration? There is something in the
heart which cannot be expressed verbally. Are the principles of
narrating aḥādīth not applicable to Imām Abū Ḥanīfah v?
Additionally, did the woman (who came from the tribe of Jaham) have
the same belief as Jaham ibn Safwān? Is there any proof for this claim?
Imām Abū Ḥanīfah v addressed Jaham as a kāfir (disbeliever) and
expelled him. (Fayḍul Bārī 4/514 -quoted from “Al-Musāyirah”)
Even if this woman was of this mindset, why was she then kept as a
teacher? (See Muqaddamah Anwārul Bārī 2/22-25)
This woman was from the tribe of Jaham. Was Jaham ibn Safwān also of
the same tribe? It is important to note that it was not said that this
woman was connected to the Jahmiyyah sect.
‫فا عتبروا يا أولى األبصار‬
So take warning, O people of vision!
Imām Bukhārī’s v Opinion Regarding Imām Abū Ḥanīfah v
Due to the effect of the companionship of these scholars, the following

words were written by Imām Bukhārī v regarding Imām Abū Ḥanīfah
v:
97
9(٢ ‫قسم‬ ٨١/٤ ‫ )تاريخ کبير‬. ‫ سکتواعنه وعن رأيه وعن حديثه‬، ‫کان مرجئا‬
Translation: “Imām Ṣāḥib was a Murjʾī. People remained silent about

him, his opinion and his Ḥadīth.”
ʿAllāmah Kawtharī v defended this statement of Imām Bukhārī v and

maintains a good opinion of Imām Bukhārī v. In response to this, he
mentioned that perhaps this refers to the misguided sects such as the
Khawārij and Muʿtazilah. Imām Ṣāḥib v used to debate with them.10 (See
Muqaddamah Anwārul Bārī 2/21)
9This is Imām Bukhārī’s v jarḥ against Imām Abū Ḥanīfah v. The following is a
rebuttal to this criticism: ‫( ان كنت ريحا وقد َلقيت اعصارا‬If you are a wind, then
know, you have met a tornado.) It is said in the Urdu language that it is like
giving a reply to a brick with a stone. Imām Bukhārī v did not quote this
criticism from anyone else. What effect does this criticism have? Is it able to
degrade Imām Abū Ḥanīfah v? It has become like the poet said:
‫اشفق علي الراس وَل تشفق علي الجبل‬ ‫يا ناطح الجبل العالي ليكلمه‬
10That is, they are the ones who became silent from Imām Abū Ḥanīfah v, his
opinion and his Ḥadīth. Is there any answer better than this? It is given
without any form of harshness, in a very gentle manner. Where has he twisted
the place of the pronoun to? All of Imām Bukhārī’s v tactics have gone in vain.
What remains to be discussed is with regards to him being a Murjʾī. This will
be discussed later.
These are all fabrications. In reality, there is no basis to these statements.
There is a saying which is as follows: ‘Stones are thrown at such a tree which
is bearing fruits.’ They saw that he was rapidly gaining acceptance, so people
began to throw stones at him. Some fruits have fallen, however, the tree will
not stop bearing its fruits. Rather, for every fruit that has fallen, it will bear
four more fruits. This [criticism of Imām Abū Ḥanīfah v] has been ongoing
from the era of Ibn Abī Shaybah v. In the end of his “Muṣannaf”, he writes a
chapter titled, “Ar-Radd ʿAnin Nuʿmān” which refutes Nuʿmān very clearly.
ʿAllāmah Kawtharī v wrote the following in refutation to this: “An-Nukaṭ
Ṭarīqah fit taḥadduth ʿan rudūd Ibn Abī Shaybah ʿalā Abī Ḥanīfah”.
Imām Nasāʾī v makes an objection against Imām Abū Ḥanīfah v that he is ‫الحفظ‬
‫ سيء‬-sayyiʾul ḥifẓ (has a bad retention). This word has passed in “Sharḥ
Nukhbah”. (If you are ‫جيد الحفظ‬-jayyidul ḥifẓ (have a good retention), you will
remember its meaning and if you are ‫سيء الحفظ‬-sayyiʾul ḥifẓ, you would have
98
It is also possible that stupid, ignorant people and those who do not
research and investigate are meant. Such people who consider every
type of rumour and false report to be true. Otherwise, this claim clearly
contradicts the reality. Half or two-thirds of the Islāmic world knows
and believes in Imām Abū Ḥanīfah v and follows his school of thought.
From his era until today, many great fuqahāʾ, muḥadditithīn, mystics
and pious people have relied on his research. Many of them are the
Shaykhs (teachers) of Imām Bukhārī v as well as the Shaykhs of his
Shaykhs. Imām Waqīʿ v and Yaḥyā ibn Saʿīd Qaṭṭān v used to pass
fatāwā on the opinions of Imām Abū Ḥanīfah v. (Dhahabī mentioned this in
Tadhkiratul Ḥuffāẓ under the biography of Wakīʿ) (Mā Tamassu ilayhil Ḥājah pg. 20)
Yaḥyā ibn Maʿīn v said: “Abū Ḥanīfah was thiqah. I have not heard of
anyone who classified him as weak.” (Ibn ʿAbdil Barr mentioned this in Al-
Intiqāʾ)
Ibn Maʿīn v also mentioned that Abū Ḥanīfah v was thiqah. He only
narrated those aḥādīth which he knew and remembered. He would not
narrate those which he did not know. (Ḥāfiẓ v mentioned this in At-Tahdhīb
from Ibn Saʿad Al-ʿAwfī)
From this it can be deduced that the criticisms which have been
mentioned were compiled afterwards [and not by his contemporaries].
Ibn Maʿīn v also put an end to the claim that he made mistakes
frequently. He did this by making the following statement: “He only
forgotten. So, we will remind you of its meaning.) Sayyiʾul ḥifẓ is used to
describe such a person whose mistakes are more than that which he correctly
narrates. (Our Mawlānā Aʿẓmī has challenged) that if a someone grades half or
more of those aḥādīth which are narrated from Imām Abū Ḥanīfah v as weak,
then it would be accurate to label him as sayyiʾul ḥifẓ. Otherwise, it is like
firing a pistol in the air. Its effect simply remains in the atmosphere. The bullet
makes a sound, but no one falls from it. These criticisms are just like that; they
are scattered particles of dust floating in the atmosphere [i.e., they bear no
weight or value. They are not strong and do not have an effect]. [Extracted from
Ifādātush Shaykh]
99
narrated that which he knew by memory, and he did not narrate that
which he did not commit to memory.” (Tahdhīb 10/450)
He also said that Shuʿbah also had a good opinion regarding him, and
he was truthful in Ḥadīth. Ibn ʿAbdil Barr v mentioned this in “Jāmiʿ
Bayānul ʿIlm”. (Muqaddamah Iʿlāʾ-us-Sunan 3/19)
Ibn Madīnī v said: “Abū Ḥanīfah v is thiqah. There is nothing wrong

about him.”
Shuʿbah v said: “By Allāh! Abū Ḥanīfah had a good understanding and
good memory.”11 (Muqaddamah Iʿlāʾ-us- Sunan pg. 19)
Ibn ʿAbdil Barr Mālikī v wrote: ʿAlī bin Al-Madīnī stated: “Thawrī, Ibn
Mubārak, Ḥammād ibn Zayd, Ḥaytham, Wakīʿ ibn Jarrah, ʿAbbād ibn
ʿAwwām and Jaʿfar ibn ʿAwn narrated from him. He is thiqah and
nothing is wrong in narrating from him.”
Additionally, he also stated: “Amongst those that narrated from Abū

Ḥanīfah, the ones that considered him thiqah and praised him are more
than those who criticised him.”12( Jāmiʿ Bayānul ʿIlm wa Faḍlihi 2/149)
11Where is Nasāʾīv, who claimed that he was ‫سيء الحفظ‬-sayyiʾul ḥifẓ? Perhaps
those who grade Imām Abū Ḥanīfahvas ‫سيء الحفظ‬-sayyiʾul ḥifẓ, do not
remember its correct meaning or they have forgotten its meaning totally.
12This is Ibn Abdil Barr Mālīkī who is an author from the early times. He
mentions that Thawrī has also narrated from him. Similarly, all the following
have narrated from him: Ibn Mubārak, Ḥammād ibn Zayd, Ḥaytham, Wakīʿ ibn
Jarrāh, ʿAbbād ibn ʿAwwām and Jaʿfar ibn ʿAwn. He further mentioned: “He
was thiqah and nothing is wrong in narrating from him.”
He further mentioned: “Those persons who have accepted Imām Abū

Ḥanīfah’s narrations, considered him reliable and praised him are more than
those who have criticized him. So, will the opinion of the majority be accepted
or the minority? [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
100
There are many other ʿibārāt (texts) similar to the above regarding
Imām Abū Ḥanīfah’s v reliability. See the introduction of “Iʿlāʾ-us-Sunan”
volume 3 for details. After reading these ʿibārāt, it becomes clear that the
tongues of the muḥaddithīn of Imām Abū Ḥanīfah’s v era were moist in
praising him. Therefore, in Imām Bukhārī’s v ʿibārāt, how can the
silence of ambiguous, unknown people affect Imām Aʿẓam’s v
reliability? As discussed previously, Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar v, in support of
Nuʿaym ibn Ḥammād, refuted the jarḥ [against Nuʿaym] by Dolābī and
Azdī by stating that it is not known who they are. It is clear, that here,
there is only mention regarding being silent. There is no actual jarḥ.
Therefore, this does not have any effect on Imām Aʿẓam’s v great
personality.
What remains to be discussed, is the accusation of irjāʾ on Imām Abū

Ḥanīfah v. It is known that he was a Sunnī. If he was ascribed to irjāʾ,
his irjāʾ would be something according to Sunnah and not the irjāʾ of
bidʿah. In reality, his differences with the muḥaddithīn were only lafḍī
[i.e., in its wording]. There was no difference in reality. Therefore, from
this word “irjāʾ”, his reliability is not affected in any way.
The Reality of the Accusation of Irjāʾ
The reality of the situation is that when Imām Abū Ḥanīfah v

overpowered the Mʿutazilah and others with strong and solid
evidences, and established that actions are not a part of ʾīmān, rather,
they (i.e., actions) are excluded from its definition, they began to call
him a Murjīʾī. Ghassān Kūfī, who was from the Murjiʾiah sect, regarded
Imām Abū Ḥanīfah v as a Murjīʾī in order to deceive the people. He
ascribed statements of irjāʾ to Imām Ṣāḥib v so that his madh-hab
would become known through Imām Ṣāḥib v. That is, he wished to take
unfair advantage of Imām Ṣāḥib’s v acceptance.
101
Those muḥaddithīn 13 who were displeased and disagreed with the

Ḥanafī judges of the time, they also used this word irjāʾ for their own
benefit and placed accusations on Imām Abū Ḥanīfah v and the Aḥnāf.
However, where can the truth remain hidden? (See Mā Tamassu ilayhil
Ḥājah pg. 19)
If this statement of Imām Bukhārī v is correct, it would also be correct

to say that Imām Bukhārī v and those with similar beliefs to him were
all Muʿtazilites because like the Muʿtazilah, these scholars also consider
actions to be part of ʾīmān. If a differentiation is made [between the
jamhūr and the Muʿtazilah], this would be the same differentiation
between the Imām Abū Ḥanīfah v’s school of thought and the Murjiʾiah.
Why is this disregarded? In Kitābul ʾĪmān, it has become apparent that
the differences between Imām Abū Ḥanīfah v and the muḥaddithīn are
merely differences with regards to the subtle details of the way it is
interpreted. In the outcome, there is no difference. It is for this reason,
the words of Imām Bukhārī v, “He was a Murjīʾī”, is based on harshness
and not on reality. And Allāh l knows best.
Imām Bukhārī v also used similar words for other Ḥanafīs. For
example:
Yūsuf ibn Khālid Simtī v: He is the student of Imām Abū Hanīfah v, a

famous muḥaddith and faqīh. He solved forty thousand (40,000)
masāʾil from Imām Abū Hanīfah v. He was a special member of Imām
Abū Hanīfah’s v majlis14 (committee) for the compilation of fiqh. His
narrations are found in Sunan Ibn Mājah. Imām Muzanī v regarded him
to be amongst the akhyār and abrār (pious and righteous servants of
13At that time, in most places, most of the qāḍīs (judges) were Ḥanafīs
because it is the Ḥanafī fiqh which finds solutions to the rulings with ease. The
other types of fiqh do not have such a broad scope. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
14It becomes known that Imām Abū Hanīfah v had a consultation committee
for fiqh. The rulings would be written after consulting with the members of
the consultation committee. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
102
Allāhl). However, Imām Bukhārī v also regarded him as maskūt ʿanhu.

(Muqaddamah Anwārul Bārī 2/25)
Asad ibn ʿAmr v:
He is also the student of Imām Abū Hanīfah v and a special member of

the majlis. He is the Shaykh of Imām Aḥmad v and Aḥmad ibn Munīʿ v.
Imām Aḥmad v considered him truthful. He narrated from him. Nasāʾī
v said: “There is nothing wrong with him.” After the passing of Imām
Abū Yūsuf v, Hārūn Rashīd v appointed him as the judge of Baghdad
and Wāsiṭ. He also married his daughter to him. Imām Bukhārī v ended
the discussion by labelling him as Ṣāḥib-e-Rāʾy and by grading him as
weak. (Muqaddamah Anwārul Bārī 2/25)
You can observe the harsh opposition of Imām Bukhārī v against the
Ḥanafīs in his treatise titled, “Khayrul Kalām Fil Qirāʾah Khalf Imām”.
He showed his displeasure regarding Imām Abū Hanīfah v and wrote:
(Pg. 24).‫األمة‬ ‫السيف علي‬

َ ‫ويرى‬،‫ي َل بأس به‬ ِّ ‫عم أ ِّن الخنزير‬
َ ‫البر‬ ُ ‫ويز‬
He was of the opinion that pigs on land are ḥalāl (lawful) and that it is
permissible to draw one’s swords on the ummah.
He did not explicitly state Imām Abū Hanīfah’s v name [and ascribe
this opinion to him]. However, this becomes clear from the context.
Both these accusations are unjust and incorrect. ʿAllāmah Ibn

Taymiyyah v defended Imām Abū Hanīfah v and he wrote: “To ascribe
the opinion of the permissibility of pigs to Imām Abū Hanīfah v is
definitely false.”15 (Minhāj-us-Sunnah16 1/259)
15This is the Sunnah of the noble people. Whenever someone becomes greatly
accepted, other people fabricate narrations against them and wish that these
fabrications become well known so that the acceptance they have gained
comes to an end. This has been occurring from that era until today. If per
chance, this also happens to you, then do not become agitated and angry about
103
It is apparent that Imām Bukhārī v did not transmit this from anyone.
Rather, this is an accusation he made without a supporting chain. This
discussion is very lengthy. We will not go into further details. For more
details one may refer to “Tāʿnīb Al-Khaṭīb” by Kawtharī v.
Question: Why did Imām Bukhārī v not mention any of Imām Abū
Hanīfah’s v narrations in his Ṣāḥiḥ, even though he met the younger
students of Imām Abū Hanīfah’s v students?
Answer: As mentioned previously, he considered Imām Abū Hanīfah v

to be maskūt ʿanhu. He disagreed with Imām Abū Hanīfah v to the
extent that he said: “I will not collect any narration of such a person
who is of the opinion that actions are not part of ʾīmān.” (Ibn Mājah aur
ʿIlm Ḥadīth pg. 107 and Hadyus Sārī pg. 479)
Similarly, Imām Bukhārī v did not collect any of Jaʿfar Ṣādiq’s

narrations which other people have accepted. (Ibn Mājah aur ʿIlm Ḥadīth
pg. 107)
He also did not collect any of Imām Shāfiʿī’s v narrations although he

met his students. He only collected two narrations from Imām Aḥmad
v: one taʿlīqan (with a break in the beginning of the chain) and the
other with a wāsṭah (with the connecting link of the chain). Similarly,
Imām Muslim v did not collect any of Imām Bukhārī’s v narrations.
Imām Aḥmad v did not collect any of Imām Mālik’s v narrations from
Nāfiʿ through Shāfiʿī although, with the exception of four chains, this is
from the most authentic of chains.
it. Rather, remain calm and bear it with patience. ‫إن هللا مع الصابرين‬-Verily, Allāh l
is with the patient ones. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
16Minhāj-us-Sunnah: This is Ibn Taymiyyah’s v book which is in refutation of
the Shiʿas. It is a highly accepted book. However, there is slight harshness
within it. Due to this, it has been criticised. See “Tanwīr-ul-Hāwī” for details.
We have discussed the details regarding this in this book. [Extracted from Ifādātush
Shaykh]
104
Kawtharī v explained the reason for this. He said that in light of the
faith and trustworthiness of these aʾimmah, it is apparent that he
believed that the aḥādīth of these aʾimmah were maḥfūdh (protected
and preserved). There was no fear of losing their aḥādīth as their
students had memorised and preserved them. It is indeed a form of
oppression to believe that he did not collect their narrations due to him
being affected by the criticism done by others or due to him being
prejudiced. If such criticism was to be considered, no one would be
saved.17(Kawtharī’s Footnotes on Hāzimī’s Shurūṭul Aimmah ‫( بمعناه‬paraphrased) Pg.
81)
17However, how would Kawtharī v and those who have a similar opinion
reply to the following objection: If this is the case, then why did Imām Bukhārī
v narrate frequently from Imām Awzāʿī, Sufyān Thawrī, Ibn Jurayj and Layth
ibn Saʿad ‫ ?رحمهم هللا‬Was there a fear of losing their narrations and had not their
students memorised and preserved their narrations? What is the benefit of
formulating such an explanation on every occasion? Since Imām Bukhārī v did
not have a good opinion of Imām Abū Ḥanīfah v, then why would he narrate
from him? From the words Imām Bukhārī v used when mentioning Imām
Shāfiʿī v in “Tārīkh Kabīr”, it can be deduced that Imām Shāfiʿī v also did not
hold any high significance in his (Imām Bukhārī’s v) opinion. He did not even
write a letter in his praise; he only mentioned his name, lineage and kunyah.
(Mawlānā Muḥammad ʿAbdur Rashīd Nuʿmānī) )‫)رحمه هللا رحمة واسعة‬
105
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS TRIALS & DEATH
The Trials of Imām Bukhārī v and the Incident of His Death1
There was a difference of opinion regarding the issue of ‘Khalq-e-

Qurʾān’ between Imām Bukhārī v and his Shaykh, Imām Dhuhalī v.
After this, the trials of Imām Bukharī v began. Ḥāfiẓ v mentioned a few
narrations regarding this in his introduction. A brief summary is as
follows:
In 250 A.H. Imām Bukhārī v went to Nayshāpūr2. When Imām Dhuhalī

v was informed of his arrival, he said in a gathering, “Tomorrow I am
going to welcome Imām Bukhārī v. Whosoever also wishes to go [to
welcome him] can accompany me.” Accordingly, Imām Dhuhalī v and
some other ʿulamāʾ of Nayshāpūr went ahead two or three manzils to
meet and welcome him. Imām Muslim v said: “I have never seen the
people of Nayshāpūr welcome any ʿālim or leader in such a manner.”
On arriving, Imām Bukhārī v stayed in Dārul Bukhāriyayn, and he
began narrating aḥādīth. Imām Dhuhalī v also told the people, “Go, and
listen to aḥādīth from this pious man.”3
Some narrations states that the gathering of Imām Dhuhalī v began to

decrease. Due to this, he began making objections against Imām
1Being afflicted with difficulties and trials is also the way of the Buzrugs
(noble, righteous personalities). For example, Imām Abū Ḥanīfah v and Imām
Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal v also experienced trials. This is because sometimes, a
person is faced with certain situations when he tells and supports the truth.
2The first time (he visited Nayshāpūr) was in 209 A.H. The second time was in
250 A.H. and he stayed there for five years. (Siyar Aʿlāmun Nubalāʾ 12/406 fī
Tarjumatil Bukhārī)
3This was the first meeting in the beginning. At that time, their relationship
was good. Differences did not arise as yet. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
106
Bukhārī v. In some places, it is mentioned that Imām Dhuhalī v

prohibited the people from asking about ʿaqīdah (belief) issues. On one
occasion, there was a huge gathering two or three days after he
arrived. Someone asked the question: Is ‫ لفظى بالقرآن‬makhlūq or not. At
first, Imām Bukhārī v ignored this question. Upon the person’s
insistence, he replied:
ُ ِ‫القُرآ ُن كال ُم هللا‬

.‫ واَلمتحانُ بدعة‬،‫ وأفعا ُل العبا ِد مخلوقة‬،‫غير مخلوق‬
“The Qurʾān, the word of Allāh is not created, the actions of the
servants are created and to ask about this is an innovation.”
In the narration of Imām Muslim v, the wording is as follows:
4.‫افعالِنا‬ ُ ‫أفعالُنا مخلوقة وألفا‬

‫ظنا من‬
“Our actions are created and our words are from our actions.”
Consequently, differences of opinion arose amongst the people. Some

were saying that he said that ‫ لفظي بالقرآن‬are ‫( مخلوق‬created) and some
were saying that he did not say this. When they went into an uproar
regarding this, the owners of the house came and drove the people out
of the house.
Imām Bukhārī v said: “Whosoever claims that I said that ‫ لفظي بالقرآن‬are
‫(حادث‬created), is a liar. I did not say this. Rather, I said that
‫( افعال العبا ِد مخلوقة‬the actions of man are created).”
In one narration it is mentioned: “People’s movements, their voices,

their earnings and their writings are all created. However, the Qurʾān
4In that era, a person was classified as a bidʿatī (innovator) if he said

‫لفظي بالقرآن مخلوق‬. So, some people paraphrased and interpreted Imām Bukhārī’s
v words and claimed that Bukhārī v said: “‫”لفظي بالقرآن مخلوق‬. Therefore, he has
become a bidʿatī and they also informed Imām Dhuhalī v of this. [Extracted from
Ifādātush Shaykh]
107
which is established in book form and protected in the hearts, is the

Kalām (speech) of Allāh l and it is ‫( غير مخلوق‬not created).”
“. ‫” بل هو آيات بينات في صدور الَّذين أوتوا العلم‬
“Rather it (the Quran) is clear verses [preserved] in the hearts of those who
have been given knowledge.”
When the people informed Imām Dhuhalī v that Imām Bukhārī v said
that ‫ لفظي بالقرآن‬are created, he said: “Whoever says such a statement is
an innovator. No one should sit next to him [the one who makes this
statement] nor should he speak to him. Those who go to Muḥammad
ibn Ismāʿīl are considered accused because only those who follow him,
will go by him.” When Dhuhalī v announced this, the people began to
disconnect themselves from Bukhārī v. Only Imām Muslim v and
Aḥmad ibn Salamah v remained with Imām Bukhārī v. Dhuhalī v said:
“Whoever has such a belief is not allowed to come in our majlis.” Imām
Muslim v took his cloth and placed it on his ʿimāmah (turban)5 and in
front of everyone, he stood up and left (the gathering). He loaded those
aḥādīth he wrote from Dhuhalī on camels and returned them back to
him.6 (Hadyus Sārī pg. 490)
5 It becomes known that he wore an ʿimāmah in his teacher’s majlis. If you

consider Imām Muslim v to be a personality worthy of respect and honour,
then you all should also wear an ʿimāmah. Imām Bukhārī v also wore an
ʿimāmah in his final moments in this world. Learn the method of wrapping an
ʿimāmah now so that it does not occur that if it unwraps, it remains
unwrapped forever. Therefore, inculcate the habit of wrapping it from now. It
is an excellent action. The rewards of ṣalāh also increase if it is worn. This is
the fatwā of Ḥazrat Gangohī v as mentioned in his “Fatāwā Rashīdiyyah”.
6 This is a great tragedy. Such corruption is created by false reports. This is an
incident which teaches an important lesson. Ponder upon it for a short period
of time. How powerful is the destruction which is caused by false rumours?
108
On this occasion Ḥāfiẓ Ṣāḥib v wrote that Imām Muslim v has done
justice by not including any narration from Imām Bukhārī v nor Imām
Dhuhalī v in his book.
Aḥmad ibn Salamah v said: “I told Imām Bukhārī that in Khurāsān and
specifically in this city Nayshāpūr, he (i.e., Imām Dhuhalī) is a person
who is recognised and respected and he has remained firm in his
opinion on this masʾalah (issue) None of us are able to speak to him.
So, what is your opinion? Imām Bukhārī v held his beard and said:
“.‫صير بِ ْال ِعبَا ِد‬ ُ ‫” أُفَ ِّ ِو‬

ْ ‫ض أ َ ْم ِر‬
ِ ‫ى الَى‬
ِ َ‫ ا َِّن هللاَ ب‬، ‫هللا‬
“I entrust my affair to Allāh. Indeed, Allāh is All-Seeing of His servants.”
O Allāh! You know that I did not choose to stay in Nayshāpūr to boast
or seek leadership. The only reason I do not wish to go to my native
country is because my adversaries there are very dominant. (From
this, it becomes known that before this incident people in Bukhārā had
opposed Imām Bukhārī v. Other narrations which also support this will
be further mentioned.) This person (Dhuhalī) is jealous simply because
of my knowledge.
Aḥmad, I will leave this city tomorrow so that you all can be saved from
the trouble that you all are facing because of me.” (Hadyus Sārī pg. 491)
In one narration it is mentioned that when Imām Muslim v and Aḥmad

ibn Salamah v left Dhuhalī’s majlis, Dhuhalī said: “This person cannot
stay with me in this city.” From this statement, Imām Bukhārī v
perceived that his life was in danger and thus, he departed from this
city.
It is narrated that on the occasion of this dispute, Muḥammad ibn

Naʿīm asked Imām Bukhārī v about ʾīmān. So, he said:
109
‫رسول هللا صلي هللا عليه‬

ِ ِ ‫ وأفض ُل اصحا‬،‫غير مخلوق‬
‫ب‬ ُ ِ‫ والقرآنُ كال ُم هللا‬،‫وينقص‬
ُ َ ‫قَ ْول َو‬
ُ‫ع َمل يَزيد‬
ُ ُ ‫ علی هذا ح ِييتُ وعليه أموتُ وعليه أ‬.‫وسلم ابو بكر ث ِّم عم ُر ث ِّم عثمانُ ث ِّم علِي رضي هللا عنهم‬
‫بعث‬
. ‫ان شاء هللا تعالى‬
“(Imān is a combination of) qawl (speech) and amal (actions). It increases and
decreases. The Qurʾān, the word of Allāh is not created. The most virtuous of
the Messenger of Allāh’s n companions is Abū Bakr, then ʿUmar, then ʿUthmān,
then ʿAlī g. Upon this [belief] I live, upon it I will die and upon it I will be
resurrected.”
110
Return to Bukhārā and Differences with the Leader of Bukhārā
Ḥāfiẓ v wrote in his introduction: “When Imām Bukhārī v returned to

Bukhārā (from where and when has not been mentioned in the
narration), a dome was erected one farsakh (three miles) away from
the city and all the note-worthy personalities welcomed him. Dirhams
and dinārs were showered upon him. He stayed there until a period of
time and then he had differences with the leader of Bukhārā. So, he
(the leader) commanded him to leave the city. At this time, Imām
Bukhārī v went to Baykand.” (Hadyus Sārī pg. 493)
In one narration, the reason for the difference has been mentioned as
follows: “The leader of Bukhārā, Khālid ibn Aḥmad Dhuhalī,
commanded Imām Bukhārī v, via a messenger as follows: ‘Come by me
and recite to me your “Jāmiʿ” and “Tārīkh”.’ Imām Bukhārī v told the
messenger: ‘Tell him that I will not disgrace this knowledge; I will not
take it to the door of a king. If there is a need, come to my house or the
masjid to listen and if you dislike this, then you are the sulṭān (king);
prevent me from hosting a gathering so that it can be an excuse for me
on the day of Qiyāmah in front of Allāh l to be saved from the
punishment of concealing knowledge.’” (Ibid)
Another narration mentions that the leader of Bukhārā, Khālid ibn

Aḥmad Khalīfah ibn Ṭāḥir said: “Come to my house and recite “Jāmiʿ”
and “Tārīkh” to my children.” Imām v refused and said it is not
befitting that I recite aḥādīth to a special group of people where there
is no permission for others (to participate).7Because of this, Khālid
used Ḥarīth ibn Abī Waraqah and others (to object against Imām
Bukhārī v). They all made objections to Bukhārī’s madh-hab, so the
leader expelled him from the city. Imām Bukhārī v supplicated against
them: “Oh Allāh! The desire that these people have regarding me (in
7In the beginning, the leader had ordered for him to come to his home and
recite. Thereafter, he ordered for a special majlis for his children as has been
mentioned in another narration. Imām v rejected this. (Muqaddamah Lāmiʿ page 12)
111
dishonouring me), also make them experience the same with regards
to themselves, their children and their families.”
Consequently, in less than a month’s time, the leader, Khālid was

dishonoured, disgraced and imprisoned and Ḥarith experienced such a
thing within his family which is not worthy of being mentioned and so
and so was also tested regarding his children and was afflicted with
difficulties. (Ibid)
In one narration it is mentioned that after leaving Bukhārā, he went to

Khartang, a village in Samarqand, where he had relatives. (This village
is two to three farsakh from Samarqand. (12 Muqaddamah Lāmiʿ pg. 30) He
made this his residence. ʿAbdul Quddūs ibn ʿAbdul Jabbār v said: “One
night, after the night prayer, I heard him supplicating in the following
manner: “. ‫اَلرض بما ر ُحبَت فا ْق ِبضْني اليك‬
ُ َّ ‫”اللهم قد ضاقتْ عل‬-“Oh Allāh, the earth
‫ي‬
(land) has become narrow for me despite its vastness, so raise me to
you.” He passed away within a month. (Ibid)
An objection is raised against this: praying and wishing for death has
been prohibited in the Ḥadīth. Imām Bukhārī v himself mentions this
narration in his Ṣaḥīḥ. So why then did he still desire and pray for
death?
A possible answer for this is that the prohibition mentioned in the

Ḥadīth is regarding praying or hoping for death out of fear of worldly
difficulties. If one does this to save oneself from corrupting one’s Dīn,
then there is nothing wrong in doing so. This action of Imām Bukhārī v
should be interpreted like this. (Muqaddamah Lāmiʿ pg. 5)8
8 It is mentioned in a Ḥadīth: “‫”وإذا أردت فتنة في قوم فتوفني غير مفتون‬- “And if You
wish to test the people with trials, grant me death without [placing me] in this
trial.” Therefore, he prayed for death in order to end the fitnah. Thus, there is
nothing wrong with this. Mawlānā ʿAbdul Jabbār ṣāḥib Aʿẓmī v, the author of
“Jamiʿ-ad-Darārī” gave this answer. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
112
“The differences of opinion among people causes fitnah (corruption).

By my death, the disputes and fitnah will come to an end.” (Jāmiʿ-ud-
Darārī pg. 42)9
Muḥammad ibn Abī Ḥātim, Warrāq Bukhārī, said: “I heard Ghālib ibn
Jibrāʾīl, (Imām Bukhārī v stayed by him during his stay in Khartang)
saying that Imām Bukhārī v fell ill for a few days. The people of
Samarqand sent an envoy to invite him to come by them. Imām v
accepted and prepared to depart. He put on his socks, tied his turban,
and he took approximately twenty steps to mount his animal. I was
holding his arm when he said to me: “Leave me, I have become weak.”
We left him. He supplicated and lied down. He then passed away.
(Indeed, to Allāh l we belong and to Him we shall return.) After this,
lots of perspiration emitted from his body. He had told us to shroud
him in three cloths without a turban and kurta (upper garment). We
did exactly as he told us. After shrouding him and performing the
janāzah ṣalāh, we placed him in his grave. A very nice fragrance, like
musk, emanated from his grave and it remained for a few days. For a
few days, people took soil from the grave until we placed a wooden
lattice on top of the grave.” (Hadyus Sārī pg. 493)
‫رسید از دست محبوبے بدستم‬ ‫گلے خوشبوئے در حمام روزے‬

‫تو مستم‬ ‫کہ ازبوئے د آل ویز‬ ‫بدو گفتگم کہ مشکی یا عبیری‬
‫و لیکن مد تے با گل نشستم‬ ‫بگفتہ من گلے ناچیز بودم‬
‫و گر نہ من ہماں خاکم کہ ہستم‬ ‫جمال ہمنشیں در من اثر کرو‬
9In our opinion, the reason for this is that it had now become difficult to
spread knowledge. So, what was the benefit of remaining alive? Fazl
{The objective of living was to spread knowledge, to spread the Dīn. Now, it
became difficult to go to his native country. Residing in another place also
became difficult. So, now what is the purpose of remaining alive? Therefore,
he did what he did. He now desired to go to that place where he will receive
the rewards for his actions. He also prayed for this. This is the humble opinion
of the compiler of “Hadiyyatud Darārī”. If you do not agree, it can be refuted.}
113
(‫(گلستان سعدی‬
(Jāmiʿ-ud-Darārī Muqaddamah Sharḥ Bukhārī pg. 42 by Mawlānā ʿAbdul Jabbār
Ṣāḥib Aʿẓmī, former Shaykhul Ḥadīth in Madrasah Qāsimiyyah Shāhī Murādabād)10
In Kirmānī’s v introduction, the following is mentioned: “When Imām

Bukhārī v was buried, there was a beautiful fragrance of musk
emanating from his grave and above the grave towards the sky white,
high walls became apparent, and people were carrying the soil of the
grave for blessings until it became a pit. When it became difficult to
protect it by appointing guards, a wooden lattice was placed. Even
then, people continued to take the soil and pebbles surrounding the
grave. This fragrance remained for so many days to the extent that this
was well known amongst the people of the city. It is not farfetched for
such a karāmah to occur for such a Buzrug (great, noble and righteous
personality). (pg.12)
Date of Death
10Shaykh Saʿdī v has mentioned a hypothetical scenario to highlight the

benefit which is gained from being in good company. (Similarly, there are
many hypothetical scenarios in Mawlānā Rūmī’s v statements. They have not
occurred. Rather, they are fictional. However, there is advice within it. It is for
this reason it is presented in this manner.) There is a fragrant soil. One day, in
the bathroom, this fragrance came into my hands from my beloved’s hands. I
asked the soil: “Are you musk or amber? Because I am in love with your
fragrance which attracts the hearts.” The soil replied: “I was an insignificant
particle of soil which had no value. However, for a long period of time, I sat
with the flowers. So, the beauty of my friend (the flowers) left an effect on me.
Therefore, I became fragrant. Otherwise, I was only soil. However, due to the
company of my friend, the fragrance also became part of me” Similarly, the
grave of Imām Bukhārī v is also saying something similar to this:
“When Imām Bukhārī v came into me, he came with the fragrance of aḥādīth.
So, through his company, I have also become fragrant.” [Extracted from Ifādātush
Shaykh]
114
ʿAbdul Wāḥid ibn Ādam Ṭawāwaysī said: “I saw the Messenger of Allāh
n in a dream and there were also a group of the noble Ṣaḥābah g with
him. The Messenger of Allāh n was standing in one place. I said salām
and asked: “Ḥazrat why are you standing here?” He said: “I am waiting
for Muḥammad ibn Ismāʿīl.” When I received the news of Imām’s death,
I calculated that it was at that same time I saw Messenger of Allāh n in
my dream.” This incident took place on Saturday night, ʿĪd-ul-Fiṭr 256
A.H. His blessed age was thirteen days less than sixty-two (62) years.
‫تغ ّمده هللا برحمته‬-May Allāh envelop Him with His mercy. Āmīn. (Hadyus Sārī
pg. 493)
Someone has combined the year of birth and death and his blessed age
in a poem:11
‫صحي َح ُمكَ ِ ِّم َل التِّحرير‬

ِّ ‫ج َم َع ال‬ ً ‫كا َن البخارى حافظا ً ومحدِّثا‬
ٍ ‫فِيها َحميد وانقَضى في ن‬
‫ُور‬ ِ ُ ‫مِ يالد ُه صدق ومدة‬
‫عمره‬
٢٥٦ ٦٢ ١٩٤
١٩٤=١٠٠ : ‫ق‬ ٤:‫د‬ ٩٠ :‫ص‬
٦٢= ٤ : ‫د‬ ١٠ :‫ي‬ ٤٠ :‫م‬ ٨ :‫ح‬
٢٥٦ =٢ ٠٠ : ‫ر‬ ٦ :‫و‬ ٥٠ :‫ن‬
(Muqaddamah Bukhārī -Muḥaddith Mawlānā Aḥmad ʿAlī Sahāranpūrī pg. 5)
A Lesson
Qasaṭālanī v mentioned that after the death of Imām Bukhārī v, his

opponents came to his grave and repented. On one occasion, there was
a drought. They supplicated many times for rain. However, no rain fell.
Upon the suggestion of one pious man, the qāḍī of that time and the
people of Samarqand went by the grave of Imām Bukhārī v and
11This is a separate field. Some people are very experienced in this. They can
derive numbers from poems. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
115
(supplicated) through the wasīlah of the person in the grave (i.e.,

Bukhārī v). Thereafter, it rained. (Muqaddamah Lāmiʿ pg. 10,44)12
The Details of His Trials
From the combination of all the narrations, it can be deduced that

Imām Bukhārī v was expelled from Bukhārā many times. Mawlānā
ʿAbdur Rashīd Nuʿmānī v has discussed this in detail in the footnotes of
“Dirāsātul Labīb”13. The summary of this discussion is that such an
occasion occurred four times:
12Some people consider this to be an act of shirk (polytheism). However, the

people of Bukhārā did not consider it to be shirk. The aʾimmah arbaʿah and
mujtahidīn also do not consider it to be shirk. According to Ibn Taymiyyah,
this tawassul is shirk. This will be discussed inshāʾAllāh in Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī in
the chapter of Istisqāʾ. Books have also been written on this topic specifically.
In Karāchī, one of our students has also written a book on this. [Extracted from
Ifādātush Shaykh]
13“Dirāsātul Labīb” is a famous book. Its author is Shaykh Muʿīn-us Sindhī v.
He died in 1161 A.H. He is Shāh Walīullāh Muḥaddith Dehlawī’s v student. His
name is mentioned in Shāh Ṣāḥib’s v travelogue of the Ḥaramayn Sharifayn.
However, he became a ghayr muqallid and became inclined towards Shiʿite
beliefs. It is for this reason, the ghayr muqallidīn like this book a lot. The
Ḥanafīs have written a refutation on this book. Shaykh ʿAbdul Laṭīf Ḥāshmī
Qurshī Sindhī Tatwī v (death:1189 A.H.) has written a reply to this. The two-
volume book is titled: ‫ذب ذبابات الدراسات عن المذاهب األربعة المتناسبات‬. Mawlānā
ʿAbdur-Rashid Nuʿmānī v has written a marginalia on “Dirāsātul Labīb”
because he also has been forefront in refuting the ghayr muqallidīn. There are
also details of this in “Mā tamassu ilayhil Ḥājah”. We are compiling this
information from that book. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
116
The First Occasion
When Imām Bukhārī v returned from his journeys of knowledge, Abū

Ḥafṣ Kabīr v(death:217A.H.) was also alive. He prevented (Bukhārī v)
from issuing fatāwā. However, Bukhārī v did not refrain from this.
Thus, on one occasion, he issued the fatwā that ḥurmat raḍaʾah
(prohibition of foster relations) will be established between a girl and
boy who drinks milk from the same goat. Due to this masʾalah (ruling),
the people expelled him from Bukhārā.
There is a difference in opinion regarding the authenticity of this

incident. Mawlānā ʿAbdul Ḥay ṣāḥib v, in “Al-Fawāʾidul Bahiyah” (pg.
18), considered this to be improbable. Mawlānā ʿAbdur Rashīd Nuʿmānī
v considers this to be possible as he was young at that time. It is
possible that he did not get a chance to ponder over it and thus, he gave
such a reply. It has also been narrated regarding some other aʾimmah
that they were not able to give a reply in some of the well-known
masāʾil as this was not their field. Mawlānā Nuʿmānī v writes that this
incident has also been mentioned by Qāḍī Ḥusayn ibn Muḥammad ibn
Ḥasan Mālikī v in his famous “Tārīkhul Khamīs” (vol. 2, pg. 382). Ibn
Ḥajar Makkī v also indicated towards it in “Alkhayratul Ḥisān” (pg. 70).
(Mā Tamassu ilayhil Ḥājah pg. 27)
117
The Second Occasion
The second time when the scholars of Bukhārā wrote a public

declaration14 stating: “ʾĪmān is ghayr makhlūq. Whoever considers
ʾīmān to be makhlūq is a kāfir (disbeliever).” Imām Abū Bakr ibn
Ḥāmid, Imām Abū Ḥafṣ Zāhid and Shaykh Abū Bakr Ismāʿilī endorsed
it. At this time, many people departed from Bukhārā. Imām Bukhārī v
was also amongst them.15 The author of “Fuṣūl ʿAmādiyyah” also
mentioned this. Abū Ḥafṣ Kabīr was also alive at this time. Imām
Bukhārī v was twenty-three (23) years old at that time.
The Third Occasion
The third time he left was after the incident in Nayshāpūr when Imām
Dhuhalī v wrote about Imām Bukhārī’s v incident to the rulers and
scholars of Bukhārā. At that time Abū Ḥafṣ Ṣaghīr (death 264 A.H.)
expelled Bukhārī v towards the boundaries of Bukhārā. Dhahabī v
mentioned this incident in “Siyar Aʿlāmin -Nubalāʿ”. (ʿAllāmah
Kashmīrī v expressed his doubts regarding Abū Ḥafṣ Ṣaghīr being part
of this expulsion because Imām Bukhārī v and Abū Ḥafṣ Ṣaghīr were
travel companions for knowledge. They would exchange gifts with each
other. Therefore, until the cause for dislike is unknown, this story
cannot be relied upon.)16 (Muqaddamah Lāmiʿ pg. 13)
14 ‫ محضر‬- a public declaration, i.e., in the form of a written document. [Extracted

15This is because how can a person’s ʾīmān be ghayr makhlūq? When the
human being is makhlūq (created), how can Imān be ghayr makhlūq. It is not
known how those persons signed and endorsed this document. Imām Bukhārī
v said: “This is incorrect. I will not endorse it. I will leave but I will not be part
of this wrongdoing.” [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
16However, the reason he left is because the ruler of Bukhārā became very
angry and had evil intentions with regards to Imām Bukhārī v. However, the
son of Abū Ḥafṣ Kabīr Muḥammad ibn Ḥafṣ (Abū Ḥafṣ Ṣaghīr) found out about
this and sent Imām Bukhārī v to the boundaries of Bukhārā. (See Fawāʾid Bahiyah
page 19)
118
The Fourth Occasion
The final time he was banished was the one after which he went to
Khartang. He passed away there. At that time, he was expelled due to
the story which has been mentioned previously.
Khartang is known as Khājā Ābād nowadays. A pious person from

Bukhārā narrated this from Shaykh Jalālul Dīn Qāsmī v. Mawlānā Taqī-
ud-Dīn Madhāhirī Nadwī v mentioned this (on pg. 76) in the book he
wrote about Imām Bukhārī v.
(Extracted from Taḥqīq Ahl Ḥadīth. Author: ʿAllāmah Ḥabībur Raḥmān Aʿẓmī (May Allāhl
enlighten his grave.) (Page 31)
In the narration the word “khufyah-secretly” is not mentioned, however due

to the friendship between the two, this meaning of the narration was taken.
And Allāh l knows best. Fazlur Rahman Azmi.
119
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS BOOKS AUTHORED BY IMĀM BUKHĀRĪ
Books Authored by Imām Bukhārī v
Qasṭalānī v said: “His books are famous in the world like the sun. Only
someone affected by Shayṭān would reject their status.” His books are
as follows:
1. Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī (‫)صحيح البخاري‬

Its full name is: ‫مور رسول هللا ﷺ وسُننِه وأيِّامِ ه‬
ِ ‫ختصر مِ ن أ‬
ُ ‫الجامع ال ُمسندُ الصحي ُح ال ُم‬
(Muqaddamah Nawawī lī Sharḥ Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī pg. 39)
Ḥāfiẓ v has written it as: ‫( من حديث رسول هللا ﷺ وسننه وأيامه‬Hadyus Sārī pg. 7)
This is that book which made Imām Bukhārī v renowned and the book
which is the most authentic after the Qurʾān.
2. Al-ʾAdabul Mufrad (‫)األدب المفرد‬

It was printed in India. It is part of the syllabus in some madāris.
Persian and Urdu translations have also been published.
3. Juzʾ Rafaʿ Yadayn (‫)جزء رفع اليدين‬

This was also published in India. Currently, it has been published in
Kuwait by the title “Qurratul ʿAynayn”.
120
4. Juzʿ Qiraʾah Khalf Imām (‫)جزء القراءة الخلف االمام‬

This was also published in India. It has been published in Madīnah
Munawwarah by Maktabatul Aymān by the title, “Khayrul Kalām”.
5. At-Tārīkh-ul-Kabīr (‫)التاريخ الكبير‬

This was published in Hyderabad, India. This is the book which Imām
Bukhārī v wrote in Madīnah Munawwarah during the moonlit nights as
mentioned previously. This is the book which Isḥāq ibn Rāhwayh v
presented to the leader, ʿAbdullāh ibn Ṭāhir and said: “Should I not
show you magic?” Ibn ʿAbdul Barr Mālikī v benefitted from this while
compiling his book, “Al-Istīʿāb”1. (Muqaddamah Lāmiʿ pg. 21, type-written pg.
76)
6. At-Tārīkh-ul-Awsaṭ (‫)التاريخ االوسط‬

This is from amongst the books regarding which Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar v and
Suyuṭī v mentioned that it was present at that time.2
7. At-Tārīkh-uṣ-Ṣaghīr (‫)التاريخ الصغير‬
‫االاستيعاب‬: This is a book regarding the biographies of the Ṣāḥābahg.

1(Al-Istīʿāb)
Many books have been written on the biographies of the Ṣāḥābahg. For
example: Ibn Al-Athīr Jazarī’s v “Usdul Ghābah”. Before this, Ibn ʿAbdul Barr
Mālikī’s v “Al-Istīʿāb” was written. The final book is Ḥāfiẓ’s v “Al-Iṣābah fī
Tamīziṣ Ṣaḥābah”. Similarly, there is Ibn Mundah’s v “Maʿrifatuṣ Ṣaḥābah” and
Baghwī’s v “Muʿjamuṣ Ṣaḥābah”. Books have also been written in Urdu
regarding the Ṣāḥābahgand their importance. “Maqāmuṣ Ṣaḥābah” is
authored by Muftī Muḥammad Shafīʿ ṣāḥib v and “Ṭaʿifah Manthūrah” is
authored by Mawlānā Sarfarāz ṣāḥib v. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
2The full copy of “At-Tārīkh Al-Awsaṭ”, Ibn Kathīr’s v written copy of “Al-Jāmiʿ
Kabīr, Asāmī Ṣaḥābah, Kitābul Mabsūṭ”, the copies of “Jāmiʿ Ṣaghīr” and Ibn
Taymiyyah’s full written copy of “Musand Kabīr” were all present in the
German Dārul ʿUlūm’s library before the second world war. (Footnotes of Fayḍul
Bārī page 63 from the footnotes of Sīratul Bukhārī)
These are all false reports. An Arab traveller who came and mentioned such
false reports to Mawlānā ʿAbdus Salām Mubārakpūrī v and then he went
away. He mentioned it all in “Sīratul Bukhārī”. If this was a truthful report,
there would have been mention of it in the index of “Bir wa Kalmān” and also
in the index of the famous Turkish scholar (Fawād Soz Khan). (Mawlānā
Muḥammad ʿAbdur-Rashīd Nuʿmānī v) Fazl
121
This book was published in Illahabad. Like “Tārīkh Kabīr”, there are
also some points within it which are objectionable. (Muqaddamah Anwār-
ul-Bārī pg. 24)
8. Ḳhalq Afʿālul ʿIbād (‫)خلق افعال العباد‬

Imām Bukhārī v wrote this book to establish his stance on the issue of
Khalq Qurʾān. Currently, it has been published in Kuwait by Anwārus-
Salafiyah inclusive of the research done by Badrul Badr.
9. Kitābuḍ Ḍuʿafāʾ (Ṣaghīr) (‫)كتاب الضعفاء (الصغير‬

This book has been published in Hyderabad, India. Imām Bukhārī v
classified Imām Abū Yūsuf v in this book as matrūk. (Muqaddamah Anwār-
ul-Bārī pg.25)
10. Al-Jāmiʿ Kabīr (‫)الجامع الكبير‬

Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar v and Suyuṭī v did not find this book. In “Muqaddamah
Anwār-ul-Bārī” on pg. 24, it is mentioned that its manuscript was in
Germany. In “Faḍlul Bārī” on pg. 62, it is mentioned that Ibn Kathīr v
wrote this entire book with his pen.
11. Al-Musnad Al-Kabīr (‫)المسند الكبير‬

Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar v and Suyuṭī v did not find this book. In “Muqaddamah
Anwār-ul-Bārī” on page 24, it is mentioned that its manuscript was in
Germany.
12. At-Tafsīr-ul-Kabīr (‫)التفسير الكبير‬

This book was previously mentioned. While writing its takhrīj, he
became tired and laid down as mentioned by Firabrī.
13. Kitābul ʾAshribah (‫)كتاب األشربة‬

Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar v and Suyuṭī v did not find this book. In “Lāmiʿ”, it is
mentioned that Daraquṭnī v mentioned it. (Muqaddamah Lāmiʿ pg. 21)
14. Kitābul Hibah (‫)كتاب الهبة‬

There are five hundred (500) aḥādīth in this book. On the other hand,
in Imām Wakīʿs v “Kitābul Hibah”, there are only two or three aḥādīth
122
and in ʿAbdullāh ibn Mubārak’s v “Kitābul Hibah”, there are five

aḥādīth. Suyuṭī v did not find this book.
15. Asāmī Ṣaḥābah (‫)اسامي الصحابة‬

ʿAllāmah Baghwī v benefitted from this while compiling his book,
“Muʿjamuṣ Ṣaḥābah”. Ibn Mundah v also benefitted from it while
compiling his book, “Maʿrifatuṣ Ṣaḥābah”. The manuscript of this book
was also in Germany. (Faḍlul Bārī pg. 64 & Anwār-ul-Bārī pg. 24)
123
16. Kitābul Wuḥdān (‫)كتاب الوحدان‬

This refers to those Ṣāḥābah g who have only narrated one Ḥadīth. Ibn
Mundah v quoted from this book. However, from Qasṭalānī’s v text, it
appears that “Kitābul Waḥdān” is written by Ibn Mundah v and he
copied from Imām Bukhārī’s “Asāmī Ṣaḥābah” in this book of his.
(Muqaddamah Lāmiʿ pg. 22,79)
Sometimes, ‘wuḥdān’ can also refer to that narrator from whom only
one narrator has narrated, whether the narrator is a Ṣāḥābī or a Tābiʿī
or someone else and regardless of whether only one Ḥadīth has been
narrated from him or more than one Ḥadīth has been narrated from
him. This definition is taken in “Sharḥ Nukhbah”. ‫وهو من لم يروعنه اَل واحد‬
‫( ولو سمي‬pg. 70). This book of Imām Bukhārī v was not found as
mentioned by Ḥāfiẓ v and Suyuṭī v.
17. Kitābul Mabsūṭ (‫)كتاب المبسوط‬

Khalīlī mentions this book. Ibn Ḥajar v and Suyuṭī v did not find this
book. It is mentioned in “Muqaddamah Anwār-ul-Bārī” on page 25 that
its manuscript is most likely present in Germany. This is also
mentioned in the footnotes of “Faḍlul Bārī” on page 63.
18. Kitābul ʿIlal (‫)كتاب العلل‬

Ibn Mundah v mentions this book. Suyuṭī v did not find it.
19. Kitābul Kunā (‫)كتاب الكني‬

Ḥākim Abū Aḥmad mentions this book. It was published in Dāʾiratul
Maʿārif, Hyderabad, India. Suyuṭī v did not find this book. Dhahabī v
arranged it in alphabetical order and named it “Al-Muntaqā fī Sardil
Kunyah”. (Muqaddamah Anwār-ul-Bārī pg. 26)
20. Kitābul Fawāʾid (‫)كتاب الفوائد‬
Tirmidhī v mentions this in Kitābul Manāqib under the chapter
Manāqib Sayyidunā Ṭalḥah z (2/215). Suyuṭī v did not find it.
21. Birrul Wālidayn (‫)بر الوالدين‬
124
Ibn Ḥajar v and Suyuṭī v mentions this book and considered it to be

among the books which are available. However, until today, no copy of
it has been found. (Faḍlul Bārī pg. 63)
Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar v and Imām Suyuṭī v have only mentioned the above
books. They have not mentioned “Qaḍāyāṣ Ṣaḥābah wat Tābiʿīn”
although it is Imām Bukhārī’s v first book.
22. Qaḍāyāṣ Ṣaḥābah wat Tābiʿīn (‫)قضايا الصحابة والتابعين‬

This is Imām Bukhārī’s v first book.
23. Kitābur Riqāq (‫)كتاب الرقاق‬

This has been mentioned in “Anwār-ul-Bārī” on page 25 with reference
to “Kashfuẓ Ẓunūn”.
24. Al-Jāmiʿ Ṣaghīr (‫)الجامع الصغير‬

This has been mentioned in the introduction of “Anwār-ul-Bārī” on
page 25 and in “Faḍlul Bārī” on page 63. It is also mentioned that its
copy is found in Germany. It is also mentioned in “Faḍlul Bārī” that
ʿAbdullāh ibn Muḥammad Al-Ashqar is its narrator and that Ibn Ḥajar v
wrote it with his hand. However, in “Hadyus Sārī” on page 492, it is
mentioned that Al-Ashqar is the narrator of “At-Tārīkh Ṣaghīr” and no
mention has been made of any of Imām Bukhārī’s v books by the title
“Al-Jāmiʿ Ṣaghīr”. Imām Suyuṭī v has also not mentioned any book
under this title. ‫(فليحقق‬So, this should be researched.)
25. Badʾul Makhlūqāt (‫)بدء المخلوقات‬

This has been mentioned in “Ẓafrul Muḥaṣṣilīn” on page 109 without
any description.
Imām Bukhārī v wrote all his books three times. “.‫( ” وصنّفت جميع كتبي ثلث مرات‬I
have written all of my books three times.)3 (Hadyus Sārī pg. 487)
3‫باتقريرالتنقيح‬ ‫( كأنه اراد‬i.e., with regards to revising and editing.) (Mirqāt 1/13)
{Recently, in Ramaḍān, I met Shaykh Zuhayr in Masjid Nabawī who was
working on Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī. He published a Bukhārī in Egypt which is
considered to be the best copy. However, he is revising it once more. (So, I
125
asked him: “How far have you reached?” He replied posing a question: “What
do the words of Bukhārī v: ‫ت جمي َع كُتبي ثلث مرات‬
ُ ‫ صنِّف‬mean?” Sometimes, it can
mean that the author firstly writes it. He then corrects it. He then checks it
over a third time. Perhaps, Imām Bukhārī v said: “I have written all my books
three times. That is, I do not distribute it among the people after writing it
once. Rather, I checked over it a second time and made some additions and
excluded some things. Thereafter, I checked it over a third time and made
more corrections. Only after this it was distributed among the people.” The
point of this is that it is necessary for every author to do this. It is for this
reason students are told not to leave immediately after completing an exam.
Rather, they should check it over two and three times to see what they have
written. Sometimes, something is written instead of what is actually meant.
There are many books written by Imām Bukhārī v. However, we only have a
special love for one of them. We do not have that special love for any of the
others. We have only mentioned their names.} [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
126
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS THE SPECIALITIES OF ṢAḤĪḤ BUKHĀRĪ
Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī and Its Specialities
Name
As mentioned previously, the title of this book is:
. ‫مور رسول هللا ﷺ وسُننِه وأيِّامِ ه‬

ِ ‫ختصر مِ ن أ‬
ُ ‫الجامع ال ُمسند ُ الصحي ُح ال ُم‬
Imām Bukhārī v himself gave it this title. (Muqaddamah Nawawī lī Sharḥil

Bukhārī pg. 39)
Instead of “‫”أمور‬, Ḥāfiẓ v used the word “‫”حديث‬:
1(Muqaddamah Fatḥul Bārī pg. 7).‫وسُننِه وأيِّامِ ه‬ ‫من حديث رسول هللا ﷺ‬
Specialities
1. This is the first book which was written for the compilation of only
authentic aḥādīth. (Muqaddamah Nawawī lī Sharḥil Bukhārī pg. 39)
2. There is a consensus amongst the scholars that the most authentic
books from amongst the Ḥadīth books are Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī and Ṣaḥīḥ
Muslim. Majority of the scholars agree that Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī is more
authentic and beneficial than Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim. (Ibid) It is the most
authentic book after the Book of Allāh.
3. Imām Bukhārī v took sixteen years to write this book. 2 He selected
aḥādīth from six hundred thousand (600,000) aḥādīth. This has
1The oldest reference is Nawawī’s v book, “Ḥājatul Qārī” and this was
mentioned by others also. Therefore, learn the name of the book as mentioned
above. Shaykh ʿAbdul Fattāḥ Abū Ghuddah v has written on this topic. In this
book, he presents research on the correct names of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī, Ṣaḥīḥ
Muslim and Jāmiʿ Tirmidhī. The name of the book is: “Taḥqīqu Ismī Ṣaḥīḥayn
wa Ism Jāmiʿ Tirmidhī”. People do not even know the correct names of these
books. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
127
been narrated from many angles. (Ibid pg.41) He made this book as a
proof between him and Allāh l. (Ibid)
4. Imām Bukhārī v performed ghusl before writing each Ḥadīth. He
would perform two rakʿahs ṣalāh and then write the Ḥadīth.3 It is in
this manner that this book was compiled. (Hadyus Sārī pg. 7)
5. Imām Bukhārī v reviewed his tarājim (chapter titles) between the
noble grave and minbar (pulpit) of Nabī n and he then prayed two
rakʿahs on each tarjumah. (Ibid pg.489 and Muqaddamah Nawawī pg.41)
This narration has been mentioned previously that he stayed in Baṣrah

for five years. [He said:] “I had my books with me.” He used to write
and also used to perform ḥajj every year. He used to return to Baṣrah
from Makkah Mukarramah.
One narration is as follows: he said: “I wrote “Kitābul Jāmiʿ” in Masjid

Ḥaram and before writing each Ḥadīth, I performed istikhārah, prayed
two rakʿahs and became assured of its authenticity. I did not include
any Ḥadīth in this book until I did this.” (Ibid pg.42)
Abul Faḍl Maqdisī v wrote in “Jawāb Mutaʿannatil Bukhārī” that Imām

Bukhārī v wrote his Ṣaḥīḥ in Bukhārā. It has also been said that he
wrote it in Makkah Mukarramah. He then mentioned the above
narration and gives preference to the first narration. He said: “In my
opinion, the first opinion is more correct (i.e., that he wrote it in
Bukhārā).”
Imām Nawawī v mentioned that it is possible to reconcile these

differing opinions. Rather, it can definitely be done. (Thus, there is no
need for giving preference.) It was mentioned previously that it was
written in sixteen years. Therefore, it can be understood that it was
2 The author of “Hidayah” took thirteen years to write “Hidayah”. [Extracted from
Ifādātush Shaykh]
3Therefore, the one studying aḥādīth should also perform at least two rakʿahs
before coming to class. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
128
written in all the following places: Makkah, Madīnah, Baṣrah and

Bukhārā. (Ibid pg.42)
Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar v reconciles between all these narrations in the

following manner:
Firstly, the first draft of the tarājimul abwāb, arranged in order, was
prepared in Masjid Ḥaram. Then, between the grave and the minbar of
the Messenger of Allāh n, he edited the drafts. He worked on the takhrīj
of the aḥādīth under the tarājim in his city and the other cities. (Hadyus
Sārī pg. 490) All of this work was completed in sixteen years.
6. After compiling this book, Imām Bukhārī v showed it to Imām

Aḥmad v, Yaḥyā bin Maʿīn v, ʿAlī bin Madīnī v and many others.
These people approved it and testified on its authenticity, with the
exception of four aḥādīth. ʿUqaylī mentioned that even in these four
aḥādīth, Bukhārīs v opinion is the correct one as these aḥādīth are
authentic. (i.e, in ʿUqaylī’s opinion.) (Hadyus Sārī pg. 7)
7. Abū Zayd Marwazī v said: “I was sleeping between the rukn aswad
and Maqām Ibrāhīm and I saw the Messenger of Allāh n in my
dream. He said: “Abū Zayd! Until when are you going to continue
reading Imām Shafiʿī’s v book? You do not read my book.” I asked,
“Oh Messenger of Allāh which one is your book?” He replied: “The
Jāmiʿ of Muḥammad ibn Ismāʿīl.”4 (Hadyus Sārī pg. 489)
A dream similar to this has also been narrated from the Imāmul
Ḥaramayn. (Muqaddamah Lāmiʿ pg. 24,85)
8. If Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī is read at the time of any difficulty or hardship,
that difficulty will be removed. Also, if it is taken while mounting
on a conveyance, that conveyance will be protected. This has been
narrated from the people of knowledge and virtue.
4 In this dream, it was also called “Jāmiʿ”, and we will mention another dream
of Mawlānā Muḥammad Zakariyyā v which contradicts this. He mentions this
in “Al-Abwāb wat-Tarājim”. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
129
Shaykh ʿAbdul Ḥaq Muḥaddith Dehlawī v has written that many

mashāyikh and reliable scholars have read this to achieve their
objectives, to solve their problems, to repel calamities and as a cure for
their illnesses and their objectives have been fulfilled and they have
been successful in their purpose. They have found it to have an effect
similar to an antidote.5 This is very famous among the muḥaddithīn.
Shaykh Jamāl-ud-Dīn Muḥaddith v said: “Our teacher, Shaykh Aṣīl-ud-

Dīn v mentioned that I read Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī one hundred and twenty
times for myself and others. The purpose for which I read it, that
objective was fulfilled.” Shāh ʿAbdul ʿAzīz Muḥaddith Dehlawī v also
mentioned something similar to this in “Bustānul Muḥaddithīn”.
(Muqaddamah Lāmiʿ pg. 24,84)
Ḥāfiẓ v also mentioned the experience of the people of virtue from Ibn
Abī Jamrah6 through the people of knowledge. 7 (Hadyus Sārī pg. 14)
9. Amongst the Ṣiḥāḥ Sittah, Ṣaḥiḥ Bukhārī also has this speciality
that twenty-two (22) aḥādīth are thulāthī. On the other hand, there
are only five (5) in Sunan Ibn Mājah and only one (1) in Sunan Abū
5 This is the cure for poison. However, it must be kept close to the person and
not far away from the person. Otherwise, the following Persian saying will be
true:
‫مار گزیدہ مردہ شود‬ ‫تا تریاق از عراق آوردہ شور‬
When the antidote is brought from ʿIrāq, by that time, the person bitten by the
snake will die. It is for this reason, the antidote must be in the house and not
in ʿIrāq. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
6This is a very famous ṣūfī. He compiled a book with the summary of
approximately three hundred aḥādīth from Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī. The book’s name is
“Bihjatun Nufūs”. It will be mentioned in the chapter regarding the
commentaries. It was also translated in Urdu and published in Pakistan.
7This is based on experience. Some people classify this as a bidʿah. Even when
something is Sunnah, they consider it a bidʿah. This sentiment of theirs is not
taken. This is connected to experience. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
130
Dāwūd. (Originally rubāʿī is under the same category as thulāthī.

Fazl) There is also only one (1) thulāthī in Jāmi ʿTirmidhī. There are
no thulāthī narrations in Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim and Sunan Nasā’ʾī. (Ibn Mājah
aur ʿIlm Ḥadīth pg. 119)
Twenty of the twenty-two of the thulāthīyyāt of Ṣaḥiḥ Bukhārī have

been narrated from Imām Bukhārī’s v Ḥanafī teachers. Eleven have
been narrated from Makkī ibn Ibrāhīm v, Imām Abū Ḥanīfah’s v
student (1-4,6,7,11,12,14,17,19). Six have been narrated from Abū
ʿĀṣim Nabīl Dhaḥāk ibn Makhlad v, Imām Abū Ḥanīfah’s v student
(5,8,9,15,18,21). Three have been narrated from Muḥammad ibn
ʿAbdullāh Anṣāri v, the student of Imām Zufar v and Imām Abū Yūsuf v
(10,16,20). Two remains: number 13 which has been narrated by
ʿĀṣim ibn Khālid Ḥamsī v and number 22 which has been narrated
from Khallād ibn Yaḥyā Kūfī v. It is not known whether these two were
Ḥanafīs. (Muqaddamah Lāmiʿ pg. 30. Published in Ḥijr)
Note:
In the copy published in India, it considers the nineteenth thulāthī to

ِِّ ‫س‬
be the Anṣārī Ḥadīth in ‘‫ِن‬ ِّ ‫سِن بِال‬
ِّ ‫ ال‬: ُ‫( ’بَاب‬1018/2). This is a mistake. This
Ḥadīth is the twentieth thulāthī. The nineteenth is before that: pg.1017,
Makkī ibn Ibrāhīm’s v narration in ‘‫’باب إذا قتل نفسه خطأ فال دية له‬. (Ibid)
N.B.
This speciality regarding the great amount of thulāthīyyāt is in

comparison with the other Ṣiḥāḥ Sittah. Otherwise, the mutaqiddimīn
had many thulāthī narrations. Rather, they even had thunāʿī and
wuḥdāniyāt narrations.
A separate book has been written on Imām Abū Ḥanīfah’s v

wuḥdāniyāt. Imām Aʿẓam v saw Sayyidunā Anas z. Even Darquṭnī v
accepted this. Imām Yaḥyā ibn Maʿīn v has clarified that Abū Ḥanīfah v
heard Ḥadīth from ʿĀʾishah bint Ajrad. Abū Nuʿaym Aṣfahānī Shafiʿī,
Khaṭīb Baghdādī’s teacher, has clarified that Abū Ḥanīfah v saw and
131
heard from Sayyidunā Anas, Sayyidunā ʿAbdullāh ibn al-Ḥārith and

Sayyidunā ʿAbdullāh ibn Abī Awfā g. (Al Intiṣār wat Tarjīḥ lisabṭ ibn Jawzī pg.
10-11)
Ibn ʿAbdil Barr Mālikī v also mentions a narration of Imām Abū

Ḥanīfah v in which Abū Ḥanīfah v has clarified that he heard from
Sayyidunā ʿAbdullāh ibn al-Ḥārith ibn Juzʾ z and there is no criticism on
the chain of this narration. (Jāmiʿ Bayānul ʿilm Wa Faḍlihi, published in
Mayriyah, Egypt pg. 45)
Imām Suyūṭī v also mentioned similar narrations in “Tabyīdhus

Saḥīfah”. (See Ibn Mājah aur ʿIlm Ḥadīth pg. 117)8
Thunāʿī narrations can be found in Imām Abū Ḥanīfah’s v “Kitābul

Āthār”. Along with the thulāthīuyāt of Bukhārī, this reality should not
be disregarded.9
8We have mentioned more research regarding this topic in “Sīrah Imām Abū
Ḥanīfah”. A summary of this is as follows: Many Aḥnāf scholars and some
other scholars have mentioned that Imām Ṣāḥib v heard from some Ṣaḥābah
g. However, when one has pondered upon their chains, it has been found that
they are not reliable. ʿĀʾishah bint Ajrad was not a Ṣaḥābiyyah. (Iṣabah by Ḥāfiẓ)
Shaykh Muḥammad ibn Yusuf Ṣaliḥ v writes in “ʿUqūdul Jumān” that none of
these chains are free of a narrator who has been accused of fabricating
narrations. (Page 62,63)
Currently, a book by the title, “Al-Aḥādīthus Sabʿah ʿanis sabʿah minaṣ
Ṣaḥābah” has been published. Its author is Shaykh ʿAbul Makārim ʿAbdullāh
bin Al Ḥusayn Naysabūrī v. The researcher of this book, Mawlānā Laṭīfur
Raḥmān Behrāchī, has not even found information regarding the author and
the condition of some of the narrators is not known. Without a doubt, Imām
Ṣāḥib v is a Tabiʿī; he has seen some of the Ṣaḥābahg. Not having an
established narration does not lower his status. (See Sīrah Imām Abū Ḥanīfah pg. 44)
9 Rather, this should be preserved in the heart. It will be mentioned that
“Kitābul Āthar” is Imām Abū Ḥanīfah’s v book which become famous through
Imām Muḥammad v and Imām Abū Yūsuf v. In reality, it was written by Imām
Ṣāḥib v. Suyutī v has clarified that the first book to be compiled according to
the fiqhī abwāb was written by Imām Abū Ḥanīfah v. In the same way he is the
132
10. Amongst the Ṣiḥāḥ Sittah, Ṣaḥiḥ Bukhārī is called Jāmiʿ like
Tirmidhī.
There is a difference in opinion regarding Ṣaḥiḥ Muslim being Jāmiʿ.

Majority of the scholars have considered it to be Jamiʿ as well. Shāh
ʿAbdul Azīz Muḥaddith Dehlawī v did not consider it to be Jāmiʿ as
there are very few aḥādīth regarding tafsīr. Shāh ʿAbdul ʿAzīz v has
defined Jāmiʿ as follows: That which comprises of eight fields which
have been combined in this poem:
.‫فتن واحكام واشراط ومناقب‬ ‫سير وآداب وتفسير وعقائد‬
Siyar (Military Expeditions) and Ādāb (Etiquettes) and Tafsīr

(Exegesis) and Aqāʾid (Beliefs)
Fitn (Trials), Aḥkām (Rulings) and Ashrāṭ (Signs of Qiyāmah) and

Manāqib (Virtues)
In the words of Shāh Ṣāḥib v:
.‫ مناقب ومثالب‬,‫ فتن‬,‫ سير‬,‫ تاريخ‬,‫ تفسير‬,‫ آداب‬,‫ رقاق‬,‫ احكام‬,‫عقائد‬
Aqāʾid (Beliefs), Aḥkām (Rulings), Riqāq (Heart Softening), Ādāb

(Etiquettes), Tafsīr (Exegesis), Tārīkh (History), Siyar (Military
Expeditions), Fitn (Trials), Manāqib and Mathālib (Virtues). (ʿUjāla-e-
Nāfiʿah pg. 14)
However, the author of “Fawāʾid Jāmiʿah”, Mawlānā ʿAbdul Ḥalīm

Chāshtī has objected against this10; that this terminology is not found
founder of the compilation of fiqh, he is also the founder of compiling Ḥadīth

according to the order of fiqhī abwāb. It is Suyutī v, a Shafiʿī, who clarifies this.
It is not a Hanafī who is making this claim. One should read and study
“Tabyīḍus Sāḥīfah” regarding this. The full name of the book is: “ Tabyīḍus
Sāḥīfah fi Manāqib Abū Ḥanīfah”. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
10In our opinion, this objection of Mawlānā Chishtī is very comprehensive. No
answer to this objection is known. However, in India, this definition is famous:
133
in the books of the mutaqaddimīn (earlier scholars).11 Perhaps, Shāh

Ṣāḥib v has defined this from his own opinion or by hearing it from his
teachers. Otherwise, according to the mutaqaddimīn, the word Jāmiʿ is
used for both Sunan and Muṣannaf. It is for this reason that Muwaṭṭāʾ is
called Jāmiʿ. Imām Abū Dāwūd v has called “Kitāb Sufyān”, Jāmiʿ.
Tirmidhī is known by both Sunan and Jāmiʿ. (Fawāʾid Jāmiʿah pg. 155)
See page 27-28 of this book along with the footnote.
‫تلك عشرة كاملة‬
Jāmiʿ is that which comprises of eight fields. However, this definition is not
found in the books of the mutaqaddimīn. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
11This definition is not found in the books of Uṣūl Ḥadīth which are famous
such as “Muqaddamah ibn Ṣalāḥ”, “Tadrībur Rāwī”, “Fatḥul Mughīth”,
“Tawjīhun Naẓr” and other than these. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
134
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS THE MOTIVATION FOR THE COMPILATION
The Motivation Behind the Compilation of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī
Why did the thought of compiling such a book cross Imām Bukhārī’s v
mind?
There are many reasons for this. However, before this, it is necessary
to know how many books were compiled before the era of Imām
Bukhārī v and what their specialties were.
Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar v has written: “In the era of the Ṣaḥābah g and the
senior tābiʿīn, aḥādīth were not compiled. [This was due to the
following reasons:]
Firstly, in the beginning, the Ṣaḥābah g were prohibited from writing

aḥādīth as mentioned in Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim 2/414, so that wordings of the
Ḥadīth do not become mixed with the verses of the Qurʾān.
Secondly, the memory of the Ṣaḥābah g was very strong and most of
them did not know how to write. Then, in the last era of the Tābiʿīn, the
compilation and arrangement of Ḥadīth in chapters began when there
were many ʿulamāʾ in different countries and cities and there was an
increase in groups like the Rawāfiḍ, Khawārij and those who denied
taqdīr (fate). Therefore, Rabīʿ ibn Ṣabīḥ v1 and Saʿīd ibn Abī ʿArūbah v
1 Before him, Imām Zuhrī v and Abū Bakar Muḥammad ibn Ḥazam compiled
aḥādīth. (Muqaddamah Lāmiʿ pg. 22)
In my opinion, I think that Ḥāfiẓ v means that these two were the first to
compile a book of Ḥadīth which was arranged under different chapters. Imām
Zuhrī v compiled aḥādīth only and it was not arranged in fiqhī order. Ḥāfiẓ v
himself clarifies that the first compiler of Ḥadīth was Zuhrī v, who compiled it
in the end of the first century due to ʿUmar ibn ʿAbdil ʿAzīz’s v request to do
so. It is mentioned in “Fatḥul Bārī” 1/208:
ُّ ‫دون الحديث اب ُن شهاب‬
.‫الزهری علی رأس المئة بأمر عمر بن عبد العزيز‬ ِّ ‫أول َمن‬
135
were the first to compile Ḥadīth. These righteous personalities

separated each chapter until the akābir of the third group compiled the
rulings. Accordingly, Imām Mālik v wrote “Muwaṭṭāʾ” and in this book,
he compiled the strongest aḥādīth of the people of Ḥijāz. Coupled with
that, he also compiled the fatāwā and statements of the Ṣaḥābah g and
Tābiʿīn. Ibn Jurayj v in Makkah, Imām Awzāʿī v in Syria, Sufyān Thawrī
v in Kūfah and Ḥammād bin Salamah v in Baṣrah wrote books. Then,
many of their contemporaries wrote books according to their style.
In the end of the second century, few of the aʾimmah thought of

compiling only the aḥādīth of the Messenger of Allāh n. ʿUbaydullāh ibn
Mūsā ʿAbsī Kūfī v wrote a musnad, Musaddad ibn Musarhad Baṣrī,
Asad ibn Mūsā Amwī and Nuʿaym ibn Ḥammād Khuzāʿī ‫ رحمهم هللا‬also
wrote masānīd.
The aʾimmah that came after them also compiled and wrote books.
There is rarely any muḥaddith who does not have a compilation.
Aḥmed ibn Ḥanbal, Isḥāq ibn Rāhwayh and Uthmān ibn Abī Shaybah
‫ رحمهم هللا‬also compiled masānīd. Abū Bakr ibn Abī Shaybah v also
compiled a musnad. He also compiled a book in abwāb (chapter)
format. (Hadyus Sārī pg. 4-5)
Our Shaykh Muḥaddith Jalīl Allāmah Ḥabīb-ur-Raḥmān Aʿẓmī

(ُ‫)ونور هللاُ مرقده‬
ِّ ‫ متِّعنا هللا بعُلومِ ه‬has written very great details regarding this
in the introduction of “Nuṣrat-ul- Ḥadīth”.
He wrote: “The compilation of aḥādīth began from the era of the

Messenger of Allāh n. Then, more attention was given to it during the
Ṣaḥābah’s g era, and it developed further during the era of the Tābiʿīn.”
After mentioning each one's evidence, he wrote:
136
“Apart from this custom of compiling aḥādīth, the writing of books also
began. Thus, in Makkah Muʿadh-dhamah Ibn Jurayj v (death: 150 A.H),
in Yemen Muʿamar ibn Rāshed v (death: 153 A.H), in Baṣrah Saʿīd ibn
Abī ʿArūbah (death:152 A.H) and Rabīʿ ibn Ṣabīḥ ‫( رحمهما هللا‬death:141
A.H), wrote Ḥadīth books. In that same era, Mūsā ibn ʿUqbah v (death
141 A.H.) and Ibn Isḥāq (death:151 A.H) ‫ رحمهما هللا‬2 also wrote books.
After them, in Syria Imām Awzāʿī v (death: 157 A.H.), in Khurāsān

Imām ʿAbdullāh ibn Mubārak v (death: 181 A.H.), in Baṣrah Ḥammād
bin Salamah v (death:167 A.H.), in Kūfā Sufyān Thawrī v(death: 161
A.H.), in Rai Jarīr bin ʿAbdul Ḥamīd v(death: 188 A.H.) and in Wāsiṭ,
Hushaym v (death:183 AH.) wrote Ḥadīth books. It is also in this era
that Imām Mālik v (death: 179 A.H.) wrote his famous book. Abū
Maʿshar Sindhī v (death:170 A.H.) wrote a book on the battles of the
Messenger of Allāh n. Ibrāhīm ibn Muḥammad Aslamī v (death: 184
A.H.), the teacher of Imām Shāfiʿī v, wrote a Muwaṭṭāʾ in the style of
Imām Mālik v which was double the size of Mālik’s Muwaṭṭāʾ.
Maʿafī ibn ʿImrān Mawṣalī v (death: 185 A.H.) wrote “Kitābus Sunan”,
“Kitābuz Zuhd”, “Kitābul Ādāb” and “Kitābul Fitan”. Imām Abū Yūsuf v
(death: 182 A.H.) wrote “Kitābul Āthār”3, “Kitābul Khirāj”, and many
others. Imām Muḥammad v (death: 189 A.H.) wrote “Muwaṭṭāʾ”,
“Kitābul Āthār”, “Kitābul Ḥajj”4, and many others. Walīd ibn Muslim v
2He was known as the Imām of maghāzī. He was from the same era as Imām
Abū Ḥanīfah v. He passed away only one year after Imām Abū Ḥanīfah v.
3Imām Abū Ḥanīfah v wrote “Kitābul Āthār”. His students, Imām Abū Yūsuf v
and Imām Muḥammad v narrated it from Imām Aʿẓam v just like Muwaṭṭāʾ
which is written by Imām Mālik v and then it was narrated by several of his
students from him. (Mawlānā Nuʿmānī)
4 Kitābul Ḥujaj or Kitābul Ḥujjah.
{This book of Imām Muḥammad v refutes the Ahl Madīnah. The full book title
is: “Kitābul Ḥujaj ʿalā Ahl Madīnah”.} [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
137
(death: 195 A.H.) wrote seventy (70) books on different

chapters/topics...” (Muqaddamah Nuṣrat-ul- Ḥadīth pg. 18-20)
Imām Bukhārī v was not able to meet Muḥaddith ʿAbdur Razzāq. His
Muṣannaf was completed before Imām Bukhārī v.
From these details, it becomes known that before Imām Bukhārī v,

many aḥādīth books, big and small, were completed and published. So,
which deficiency did he intend to rectify by authoring his Ṣaḥīḥ?5 Ḥāfiẓ
Ibn Ḥajar v mentioned two reasons for this:
1. Imām Bukhārī v saw that in those books, there were ḍaʿīf aḥādīth
along with the ḥasan and ṣaḥīḥ aḥādīth. It is for this reason, he
thought that such a book should be compiled in which there are
only ṣaḥīḥ aḥādīth. This intent became even stronger when, on one
occasion, Imām Isḥāq ibn Rāḥwayh v said in one of his gatherings6:
“(It would be good) if you can compile a brief collection of the
ṣaḥīḥ aḥādīth of the Messenger of Allāh n.” Imām Bukhārī v said:
“This request became embedded in my heart, and I started the
compilation of Al-Jāmiʿ al-Ṣaḥīḥ.”
2. On one occasion, Imām Bukhārī v saw in a dream that he was
standing in front of the Messenger of Allāh n. He says: “I had a fan
in my hand, and I was defending him n with it. I asked some
interpreters of dreams for its interpretation. They said: “You will
remove the accusations from the Messenger of Allāh n.” This
incident had such an effect on me that I made the intention to write
Al-Jāmiʿ al-Ṣaḥīḥ.” (Hadyus Sārī pg. 7 and Muqaddamah Nawawī pg. 41)
5That is, what motivated Imām Bukhārī v [to write Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī] when so
many books were already present in the world? The answer to this is now
understood. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
6 It is mentioned in the muqaddamah of Imām Nawawī v that we were in the
gathering of Imām Isḥāq ibn Rāḥwayh v when some of our companions said to
us. (page40), it is possible that “some companions” could specifically mean
Isḥāq ibn Rāḥwayh. And Allāh knows best. Fazl.
138
Imām Bukhārī v himself said: “I have only collected ṣaḥīḥ narrations in

this book, and those ṣaḥīḥ aḥādīth which have not been mentioned in
this book are even more than this amount.7 Ismāʿīlī, who narrated this
statement, said: “If all the ṣaḥīḥ aḥādīth had been mentioned, then in
one chapter, many narrations of the Ṣaḥābah g would be compiled, and
by compiling every ṣaḥīḥ chain for these narrations, the book would
become very lengthy.”
Ibrāhīm Nasafī v also said that I heard Imām Bukhārī v saying: “I have
only compiled ṣaḥīḥ aḥādīth in this book, and I have also omitted many
ṣaḥīḥ aḥādīth so that the book would not become too lengthy. (Hadyus
Sārī pg. 7)
7This is a point to remember because the ghayr muqallidīn say: “We only
accept the Ḥadīth of Bukhārī and Muslim. Therefore, for every masʾalah bring
evidence from Bukhārī and Muslim.” They should be asked: “Are ṣaḥīḥ aḥādīth
only in Bukhārī and Muslim? Is there no ṣaḥīḥ ḥadīth in other than these two
books?” Imām Bukhārī v used to say: “Those ṣaḥīḥ aḥādīth which are not
mentioned in this book are even more than those mentioned in this book.”
Imām Muslim v also mentioned something similar to this. Ibn Ṣalāḥ v quoted
their statements in his muqaddamah. So how can they claim that they only
accept Bukhārī and Muslim’s aḥādīth? These people recite bismillāh loudly
before Sūrah Fātiḥah. Let us begin discussing and we will begin the discussion
with bismillāh. Bring evidence for reading bismillāh loudly from Bukhārī and
Muslim. They will begin seeing stars during the day.
"‫ ”ودونه خرط القطاط‬Only ṣaḥīḥ aḥādīth were collected. He did not say that all the
narrators of the Ḥadīth I collected are all reliable. There is a big difference
between the two. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
139
140
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS THE OBJECTIVE OF THE COMPILATION
The Objective of Compiling [Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī]
The objective of the compilation of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī has been made

apparent from the previous chapter, ‘The Motivation Behind the
Compilation of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī’, i.e., to compile authentic aḥādīth as
apparent by the title, “Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī”, and the afore-mentioned details.
However, the objective of Imām Bukhārī v is not restricted to this.
Rather, highlighting beneficial fiqhī points and deriving fiqhī rulings
are also among Imām’s v most important objectives.
Ḥāfiẓ v said: “It is established that Imām Bukhārī v made authenticity a

necessary condition in this book; he made it binding to compile only
ṣaḥīḥ aḥādīth. This is the primary objective. This is established from
the title of the Ṣaḥīḥ and the explanations of the aʾimmah. Thereafter,
Imām v did not want his book to remain void of fiqhī benefits and wise
points. Therefore, from his understanding, he derived many meanings
from the text of the aḥādīth and then placed this Ḥadīth in appropriate
places which he divided into different chapters. Additionally, Qurʾānic
verses regarding laws were also given importance and he derived
unique meanings and proofs from them. He was very efficient
regarding this and he also indicated towards the tafsīr of the verses.1
Shaykh Muḥiyy-ud-Dīn v (i.e., Nawawī in “Muqaddamah Sharḥ

Bukhārī” on page 51) says: “The objective of Bukhārī v is not only
aḥādīth, but rather, his objective is also to derive rulings and proofs
from them according to the chapters. It is for this reason, many
chapters are void of a chain of transmission and the statement of the
Messenger of Allāh n is indicated towards by the name of a Ṣaḥābah g,
1 This is also one of the specialities of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī which is not present in
the other Ḥadīth books. He includes many Qurʾānic verses and derives rulings
from them, and he selects the best and most suitable verses according to the
topic. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
141
or only the text is mentioned and not the chain of narration, or it is

mentioned as a muʿallaq narration. He did this because the object is to
prove the Tarjumatul Bāb (chapter title) and many a times the Ḥadīth
is known. Sometimes it has already been mentioned, sometimes it has
recently been mentioned (Hadyus Sārī pg. 8) and sometimes it will soon be
mentioned.
In many chapters, he mentions many different narrations. Some

chapters only have one narration, and some have no narrations. Some
scholars have claimed that Imām Bukhārī v has done this intentionally
to show that according to him, no narration has been established which
is similar in meaning to the tarjumah. It is for this reason, in some
copies of the book there are also some instances where there is no
chapter above the Ḥadīth, or if there is a chapter, then there is no
Ḥadīth. In such cases, to understand Imām Bukhārī’s v objective is
difficult.
The solution to this difficult problem is solved from the statement of

ʿAbul Walīd Bājī Mālikī v. In the introduction of his book, regarding the
narrators of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī, he quoted Abū Isḥāq Ibrāhīm ibn Aḥmad
Mustamlī v (with a chain): “I have narrated Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī from the
original copy which his student Firabrī had. I have seen a few things in
it which are incomplete. There are a few blank spaces. Some have a
tarjumah without aḥādīth mentioned under it and some have aḥādīth
with no tarjumah. Therefore, we joined some with some.”
ʿAllāmah Bājī v mentioned that this is confirmed by the fact that the
narrations of Mustamlī, Sarakhsī, Khushmayhanī and Abū Zayd
Marwazī vary with regards to the order, although they all narrated
from one source. In such instances, these scholars have arranged it
based on their personal estimation. Whatever they found written on a
paper (or in a footnote)2, they added it to a specific place according to
2Here, the word ‘‫ ’طره‬is written. It can be translated as footnote or a piece of

paper. Fazl.
142
their personal estimation. It is for this reason, in some instances, you

will find two or more tarājim which are connected with no Ḥadīth
between them.
ʿAllāmah Bājī v3 said: “I mentioned this because the people of our city
seek to find a connection between the Ḥadīth and tarjumah and for
this, they would go through such formalities which were not
appropriate.”
Ḥāfiẓ Ṣāḥib v quoted this and then stated that this is a good rule to
apply when reconciliation is difficult. However, such instances are rare.
3 Bājī is not a Gujarati or a Pakistani. Rather, Bajah is a place in Spain. He used

to live in this area. Baji in Gujarat and Pakistan refers to something else.
ʿAllāmah Bājī v was a great researcher. He was a Mālikī. [Extracted from Ifādātush
Shaykh]
143
He then mentions:
The Different Forms of the Tarājim Abwāb
“I have understood that Imām Bukhārī’s v Tarājim Abwāb are in

varying styles:
1. If a Ḥadīth is found which is connected to the tarjumah, even if it is

in a subtle manner, and it is in accordance with the conditions of
Imām Bukhārī v, he mentions them with words like “‫ ”حدثنا‬etc. If
‫ عنعنه‬is also in accordance with the conditions, it is also taken in
those instances.
2. If a Ḥadīth is not in accordance with the condition, but it is worthy
of being used as evidence, it is also mentioned in the bāb (chapter).
However, the ṣegah (inflection) and style is changed. It is for this
reason, the taʿlīqāt are mentioned.
3. If an authentic Ḥadīth was not found, but such a Ḥadīth was found
which is worthy of being a support and can be used as a proof and
it is also such a Ḥadīth which a group gives preference to over
qiyās (analogy)4, then it is mentioned by using its wording or
meaning as the Tarjumatul Bāb. Then, within that chapter, a
Qurʾānic verse or such a Ḥadīth is mentioned which supports that
Ḥadīth.
In this manner, the tarjumah of the aḥādīth are of three types...” (Hadyus
Sārī pg. 9)
4 The Aḥnāf are included in this group. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
144
The Objective of the Five Imāms
ʿAllāmah Muḥammad Zāhid Kawtharī v (death: 1371 A.H.) discussed

the purpose and objectives of the five authentic books 5 (Bukhārī,
Muslim, Abū Dāwūd, Tirmidhī and Nasāʿī) in the following manner:
“The objective of Bukhārī v is to collect ṣaḥīḥ, muttaṣil aḥādīth and

derive fiqh, sīrah and tafsīr from them. It is for this reason he mentions
the mawqūf and muʿallaq narrations, the fatāwā of the Ṣaḥābah g and
Tābiʿīn and the opinions of others by the way. Due to this, the texts and
chains of narrations of the aḥādīth are scattered throughout the
chapters of the book.
The objective of Imām Muslim v is only to mention ṣaḥīḥ aḥādīth. His

objective is not to derive anything from them. It is for this reason, he
compiles the different chains of the aḥādīth in one place, so that the
differences in the texts and the number of chains become apparent.
Due to this, the texts of the aḥādīth are not scattered throughout the
book.
The objective of Imām Abū Dāwūd v is to compile those aḥādīth which

the scholars use as evidence, and those which form the basis
(foundation) of the laws. It is for this reason, he collected ṣaḥīḥ, ḥasan ,
layyin, and those aḥādīth which can be practised upon. Abū Dāwūd v
himself said: “I have not mentioned those aḥādīth in my book
regarding which there is a consensus on leaving out.”
Whichever Ḥadīth was weak, its weakness was mentioned and a

separate chapter was established for every Ḥadīth which a scholar
used as evidence or made it his madh-hab. Those aḥādīth upon which
he remained silent, they are ṣāliḥ in his opinion. A faqīh is most in need
of this.
5There is a famous book regarding this: “Shurūṭul Aʾimmah Khamsah” by

Ḥazmī. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
145
The method of Imām Tirmidhī v is a combination of both the

aforementioned methods. It is as though Imām Tirmidhī v liked the
method of Shaykhayn (Imām Bukhārī v and Imām Muslim v); i.e., he
did not leave it ambiguous. He clarified it. He also liked the method of
Imām Abū Dāwūd v and (thus, he followed his style and) mentions the
opinions of all the different madhāhib. Furthermore, he also mentions
the madhāhib of the Ṣaḥābah g, Tābiʿīn and great fuqahāʾ He also
summarises the chains of the aḥādīth by mentioning one Ḥādīth and
then indicating towards other similar narrations (with different
chains). He also mentions the grading of every Ḥadīth6; whether it is
ṣaḥīḥ, ḥasan or munkar. He also mentions the reason for weakness of a
narration or whether it is mustafīḍ or gharīb.
Nasāʾī v, even though he is of a later era, some have considered it (his

book) to be directly after the Ṣaḥīḥayn (Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī and Ṣaḥīḥ
Muslim) in rank7. This is because he is harsher than Shaykhayn with
regards to the criticism of the narrators, and after the Ṣaḥīḥayn, the
aḥādīth of his book have been the least criticized. He also explains the
hidden defects in a beautiful manner. 8
6This is mentioned based on the predominant state. Tirmidhī v did not

mention the grading of every Ḥadīth. There are also many aḥādīth which he
did not grade. However, he graded most of them. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
7Imām Nasāʾī’s v era was the latest from among the Ṣiḥāḥ Sittah. It is close to
Taḥāwī’s era.
It is for this reason, researchers like ʿAllāmah Kawtharī v and ʿAllāmah
Kashmīrī v stated: “After the Ṣaḥiḥayn, Nasāʾī is next in rank in terms of
authenticity. Then, Abū Dāwūd, then Tirmidhī and then Ibn Mājah.” [Extracted
8 Kawtharī v only mentioned this regarding Sunan Nasāʾī. However, Imām
ʿAbdullāh ibn Rushayd v said: “Sunan Nasāʾī is the best written book from
among the Sunans. The order is very good. It is a combination of the method of
both Bukhārī and Muslim. Along with that, the hidden defects are also
mentioned. In summary, after the Ṣaḥiḥayn, it is such a book in which there
146
Imām Bukhārī v pondered on the opinions and obtained the

knowledge of fiqh from the Ahl Raʾy Fuqahāʾ of Bukhārā. He
memorised the books of ʿAbdullāh ibn Mubārak v, the student of Imām
Abū Ḥanīfah v, before leaving Bukhārā. He also met different fuqahāʾ
during his journeys for knowledge. It is due to this he did his own
ijtihād.9 (Ḥāshiyah Shurūṭul Aʾimmatul Khamsah by Ḥāzimī pg. 82 with Ibn Mājah,
published by Qadīm Kutub Khāna, Karachi)
are very few criticized narrators and weak narrations. Close to it is Abū
Dāwūd and Tirmidhī.” (Muqaddamah Zahrur-Rābī by Suyūṭī v pg. 3)
That is, the objective of Imām Nasāʾī v, like Imām Bukhārī v, is to derive
rulings from the aḥādīth and to mention the chains of narration along with
their hidden defects. In many instances, there is similarity in the wordings of
the abwāb in Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī and Sunan Nasāʾī and like Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī, there is
also repetition.
9 ʿAllāmah Kawtharī v is also of the opinion that Bukhārī v was a mujtahid.
147
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS THE CONDITIONS OF BUKHĀRĪ & ITS AUTHENTICITY
The Conditions of Imām Bukhārī v In Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī

and the Authenticity of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī
The Conditions of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī
ʿAllāmah Abul Faḍl Muḥammad ibn Ṭāhir Maqdisī v (death: 507 A.H.)
wrote in the beginning of his book “Shurūṭ ul Aʾimmah Sittah”: “The
conditions of the books of Imām Bukhārī v, Imām Muslim v and the
other Ṣiḥāḥ Sittah are mentioned. It is necessary to know that the
conditions of their books have not been mentioned by the authors
themselves. Rather, you will become aware of their conditions upon
analysing their books.”1
Thereafter, he mentioned that the condition of Imām Bukhārī v and

Imām Muslim v is that they collect the narrations of such narrators
whose reliability is agreed upon. 2 [They collect] such narrations which
reach until the Ṣaḥābah g3 and whose chains are muttaṣil without any
1That is, the later scholars analysed and studied these books in depth.
Thereafter, they deduced that these were the conditions of the authors for
their respective books. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
2 ʿAllāmah Maqdisī v is a great scholar. However, he has made an error here.
We do not agree with his following statement: “The condition of Bukhārī v and
Muslim v is that they collect the narrations of such narrators whose reliability
is agreed upon.” We have mentioned the following statement of Imām Bukhārī
v previously: “I have only collected ṣaḥīḥ aḥādīth in my book, Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī.”
This statement is correct. He did not say that all the narrators are reliable.
There are almost one hundred narrators of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī and Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim
mentioned in my teacher’s book, “Iljāmul Mutaʿannitīn”, regarding whom
there is criticism. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
3ʿAllamāh Kawtharī v wrote in the footnote that Ḥāfiẓ al-ʿIrāqī v objected to

this in his commentary of “Alfiyah”. He objected because Imām Nasāʾī v has
graded a group of narrators (which Shaykhayn or one of them has collected
148
narrations from) as weak. The explanation of this is mentioned below as

extracted from “Shurūṭul Ḥāzimī”. (Page 70)
Ḥāzimī v (death: 584 A.H.) mentioned the following question and answer in
his “Shurūṭ ul Aʿimmah al-Khamsah”:
Question: Why have Shaykhayn collected narrations from mutakallam fīhi

narrators when they have made authenticity binding in their books? The likes
of Fulayḥ ibn Sulaymān, ʿAbdul Raḥmān ibn ʿAbdullāh ibn Dinār, Ismāʿīl ibn
Abī ʿUways in Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī and persons like Muḥammad ibn Isḥāq ibn Yasār
in Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim.
Answer: In Ṣaḥiḥayn there are a few narrations of such people to whom

weakness has been ascribed to. However, the weakness is not so severe that
their aḥādīth are rejected. Furthermore, we do not believe that Imām Bukhārī
v considered it correct to collect aḥādīth of such narrators in whom there is
some weakness. If he was of the opinion that they were weak, he would not
have collected their aḥādīth.
Kawtharī’s Review
Regarding this, Kawtharī v has written: There is criticism surrounding many

of the narrators of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī and Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim. (In Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī: eighty
(80) narrators, and in Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim: one hundred and sixty (160) narrators.)
The criticism is due to the following factors: bidʿah, jahālah, mukhālafah, tadlīs
and irsāl. Some people have answered this objection by saying that these
narrations are mentioned as shawāhid and mutābiʿāt (i.e., as supporting
chains). They are not mentioned as the uṣūl. Alternatively, they collected the
narration before the reason for weakness became apparent. In the
introduction of “Fatḥul Bārī”, Ḥāfiẓ v refutes this objection very strongly.
The high status of Imām Bukhārī v and Imām Muslim v is not lowered by
slight discrepancies in their books. This is because they were not flawless.
Additionally, Imām Bukhārī v passed away before the final review of his book
as has been established in many narrations. (Ḥāshiyah Shurūṭ ul Aʾimmah al-Khamsah
by Ḥāzimī pg. 83)
149
inqiṭāʿ. If there are two narrators narrating from the Ṣaḥābī, this is
better. Otherwise, they also collected narrations with only one narrator
once the chain is ṣaḥīḥ. However, Imām Muslim v collected narrations
from such narrators whose aḥādīth Imām Bukhārī v did not collect due
to a doubt. After removing this doubt, Imām Muslim v accepted their
aḥādīth. For example, he accepted the aḥādīth of the following
narrators: Ḥammād ibn Salamah, Suhayl ibn Abī Ṣāliḥ, Dāwūd ibn Abī
Hind, Abū Zubayr, ʿAlāʾ ibn ʿAbdur Raḥmān and others. We have
mentioned these five as examples because they are famous and have
many narrations. There has been some criticism regarding them.
However, it is not to the extent that their reliability and uprightness is
negated. Despite this, Imām Bukhārī v did not collect their aḥādīth out
of caution. Imām Muslim v accepted them after establishing their
reliability.
For example, there is a discussion regarding whether Suhayl bin Abī

Ṣāliḥ heard from his father or not. Some have mentioned that he used
to narrate from a ṣaḥīfah. Bukhārī v did not collect Suhayl’s narrations.
(He has only taken his narrations as supportive evidence- Dhahabī.) He
has collected the narrations of his father’s other students. However,
Imām Muslim v has collected Suhayl’s narrations as he has found that
sometimes he says: “‫ ”ابيه عن دينار بن عبدهللا عن‬and sometimes he says:
“‫”ابيه عن االعمش عن‬. From this, Imām Muslim v deduced that he heard
From Ḥāzimī’s statement, it becomes known that there are differences

regarding narrators. A narrator may be weak according to a certain
muḥaddith but according to another muḥaddith he is reliable. This is why
Muḥaqqiq ibn Humām v said that authenticity is not definitely proven when
Shaykhayn or one of them considers a narrator to have met all the conditions
of authenticity. It is also possible that this grading can be against the reality. In
Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī and Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim there are mutakallam fīhi narrators.
Therefore, it is befitting to say that this issue is based on the ijtihād of the
ʿulamāʾ. Similarly, conditions are also based on the ijtihād of the ʿulamāʾ.
Details regarding this will be further mentioned. Fazl
150
from his father. Yes, he did not hear some aḥādīth directly from his
father. Rather, he heard it through Ibn Dinār or Aʿmash or his brother
and all three of them heard from his father. If the narrations were from
a ṣaḥīfah, then why were those additional links mentioned? Thus, it has
been deduced that he heard those aḥādīth directly from his father.
(Shurūṭul Aʾimmah Sittah by Maqdisī ma-ʿa Ibn Mājah, pg. 70- Published in Karachi)
Ḥammād ibn Salamah was also mentioned as an example.
Ḥākim’s v Claim4
Abū ʿAbdillāh Ḥākim v, the author of “Mustadrak” claims that for a

Ḥadīth to be authentic, it is necessary that the jahālah regarding the
Ṣaḥābī is clarified in such a manner that there are two people narrating
from him until the end (of the chain), i.e., there are two narrators
narrating from each narrator like a testimony upon a testimony.
In “Sharḥ Nukhbah” on page 14, Ḥāfiẓ v quoted this statement of

Ḥākim v from his book, (Maʿrifah ʿUlūm Ḥadīth). He also writes that
Qāḍī Abū Bakr ibn Al-ʿArbī v considers this as a condition of Imām
Bukhārī v. In the introduction of “Fatḥul Bārī”, Ḥāfiẓ v mentions
Ḥākim’s v opinion regarding this being a condition of Imām Bukhārī v
and Imām Muslim v.
In “Shurūṭul Aʾimmah” on page 74, Ḥāzimī v (death: 584 A.H.) quoted a

lengthy statement of Ḥākim v from his “Kitābul Madkhal”. In this,
4 Ḥākim v is a great muḥaddith. Some people have praised Ḥākim v by saying

that he knows all the aḥādīth with their chains and ʿilals. However, this praise
is not found in any reliable book. It has only been mentioned in the footnote of
“Sharḥ Nukhbah”. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
151
Ḥākim v also mentions that Imām Bukhārī v and Imām Muslim v

collected narrations from such narrators who had at least two
students. Maqdisī v also mentions this statement of Ḥākim in “Shurūṭul
Aʾimmah” on page 71.5
Refuting Ḥākim v
Both Maqdisī v and Ḥāzimī v strongly refuted Ḥākim’s v statement.

Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar v also refuted it in “Sharḥ Nukhbah” and “Hadyus Sārī.”
A Summary of Maqdisī and Ḥāzimī’s Refutation
A summary of the statement of Maqdisī v and Ḥāzimī v is as follows:
Neither Imām Bukhārī v nor Imām Muslim v had such conditions.

Nothing like this has been narrated from them. Rather, this is simply
Ḥākim’s v assumption. By Allāh! This condition would have been good
had it been present in both of these books. However, this principle of
Ḥākim v is incorrect. For example, from among the Ṣaḥābah g, there is
the Ḥadīth of Mirdās Aslamī z which only Imām Bukhārī v mentions:
“‫”يذهب الصالحون األول فاألول‬- “The pious will depart one after the other.”
(2/598,952) Only this one narration is narrated from this Ṣaḥābī in Ṣaḥīḥ
Bukhārī. None of his other narrations are mentioned in Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī.
5Kawtharī v has written that Bayhaqī v also agrees with Ḥākim v regarding
this issue. A text from Kitābuz Zakāh in “Sunan Bayhaqī” makes this apparent.
Ibn Athīr v, in “Jāmiʿ-ul-Uṣūl” also agrees with Ḥākim v. It appears as though
he did not find Ḥāzmī’s v book. (Shurūṭ ul Aʾimmah by Ḥāzmī pg. 76)
Ibn ʿArbī v refutes this statement in the commentary of Muwaṭṭāʾ. (Kawtharī’s
marginalia on Maqdisī’s Shurūṭ) This means that he retracted from his previous
statement.
Abū Ḥafṣ Mayānjī v, in “An-Nukt ʿalā ibn Ṣalāḥ”, also mentions that having two
(students of a narrator) is a condition of Shaykhayn (Imām Bukhārī v & Imām
Muslim v). Among the earlier scholars, Ismāʿīl ibn ʿUlayyah v, considers it a
condition for authenticity. (1/241) (Ḥāshiyah Dhafarul Amānī by Shaykh ʿAbdul Fattāḥ Abū
Ghuddah page 45) Fazl.
152
Only Qays ibn Abī Ḥāzm, the student of Mirdās, is the narrator of this
Ḥadīth. No one else has narrated from him.
Additionally, Ḥākim v considered Mirdās Aslamī z to be such a Ṣaḥābī,

who has no narrations in the Ṣiḥāḥ. This is also an error from Ḥākim
v.6 His narration is mentioned in Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī.
Imām Bukhārī v and Imām Muslim v have narrated the narrations of

Ḥazan ibn Abī Wahab al Makhzūmī z. His only student was his son
Musayyab, whose student was Saʿīd ibn Musayyab. There are two
narrations from him in Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī:
.7‫سا َما بَيْنَ ْال َجبَلَي ِْن‬

َ ‫سيْل فِي ْال َجا ِه ِليَّ ِة فَ َك‬
َ ‫( َجا َء‬1/541)
. ‫ ماسمك‬:‫ قال‬n‫( أن النبي‬914/2)
8
Imām Bukhārī v mentioned one Ḥadīth from Zāhir ibn Al-Aswad Al-
Aslamī z. His only student is his son Majzaʾh ibn Zāhir. This Ḥadīth is as
follows:
6Ḥākim v did not remember. Ḥākim v has been praised because of the claim
that he knows all the aḥādīth with their chains and ʿilals. How can this praise
regarding Ḥākim v be correct when he does not know the narrations of Ṣaḥīḥ
Bukhārī which are brighter than the sun and clearer than daylight? [Extracted
7“In the pre-lslāmic period of ignorance a flood of rain came and filled the
valley in between the two mountains (around the Kaʿbah).” The Kaʿbah also
was covered. The mud was taken out by digging with a spade. [Extracted from
Ifādātush Shaykh]
8 Nabī n asked: “What is your name?” He replied: “My name is Ḥazn. Nabī n
said: “Change it! Ḥazan means harsh”. He replied: “I will not change it. My
father kept this name.” Saʿīd ibn Musayyab v said: “It is for this reason, there is
harshness in our family. Everyone has a hot and harsh temperament.” The
name does have an effect on the person who is named. This narration is also
mentioned in Mishkāt. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
153
َّ ‫ أ َ َّن َرسُو َل‬:‫سلَّ َم‬

ِ‫ّللا‬ َ ‫علَ ْي ِه َو‬ َّ ‫صلَّى‬
َ ُ‫ّللا‬ ُ ‫وم ْال ُح ُم ِر إِذْ نَادَى ُمنَادِي َر‬
ِ َّ ‫سو ِل‬
َ ‫ّللا‬ ِ ‫ُور بِلُ ُح‬ِ ‫إِنِِّي َألُوقِد ُ تَحْ تَ ْالقُد‬
.‫وم ْال ُح ُم ِر‬ َ ‫سل َّ َم يَ ْن َها ُك ْم‬
ِ ‫ع ْن لُ ُح‬ َ ُ َّ‫صلَّى ّللا‬
َ ‫علَ ْي ِه َو‬ َ
“I was kindling fire under pots which contained donkey meat when the
announcer of the Messenger of Allāh n announced that the Messenger
of Allāh n has prohibited you from donkey meat.” [2/600]
Similarly, they both mentioned names of a few other Ṣaḥābah g from

whom only one person narrated. For example, ʿAbdullāh ibn Hishām
ibn Zahrah Qurshī, ʿAmr ibn Taghlab, ʿAbdullah ibn Thaʿlabah ibn
Ṣuʿayr g and others.
Ḥāzimī v also refuted Ḥākim v by mentioning that Bukhārī’s first

Ḥadīth, “‫ت‬ِ ‫”األ َ ْع َما ُل ِبال ِنِّيَّا‬
ْ (which Imām Muslim v has also narrated) is
narrated with a ṣaḥīḥ chain only from Sayyidunā ʿUmar z. Additionally,
only ʿAlqamah has narrated it from him (i.e., Sayyidunā ʿUmar z) and
only Ibrāhīm Taymī has narrated it from ʿAlqamah and only Yaḥyā ibn
Saʿīd9 has narrated from Ibrāhīm.
Ḥāfiẓ v quotec the following statement of Ibn Rushayd v in Sharḥ

Nukhbah on page 15: “Bukhārī’s first Ḥadīth is sufficient to invalidate
this claim made by Qāḍī since this Ḥadīth is gharīb (fard) and the
condition of having two narrators narrating from each narrator in the
chain is missing.”
Kawtharī v wrote in the footnotes of “Shurūṭ-ul Aʾimmah” by Ḥāzimī

on page 76: “Bukhārī’s final Ḥadīth is also gharīb as Ḥāfiẓ Burhān Biqāʿī
v and others have explained.” Rather, in Ṣaḥīḥayn there are over two
hundred (200) aḥādīth like this. It is for this reason, Ḥāfiẓ Ḍiyāʾul
Maqdisī v compiled a book titled, “Gharāʾibuṣ Ṣaḥīḥayn” in which he
9This became famous after him. So, did Ḥākim v not notice the first Ḥadīth? If
he had seen the first or last Ḥadīth, he would not have said this. [Extracted from
Ifādātush Shaykh]
154
compiled the gharīb aḥādīth of Ṣaḥīḥayn.”10 (Shurūṭ-ul Aʾimmah by Ḥāzimī,

pg. 76)
Ḥāfiẓ’s v Explanation
Ḥāfiẓ v has written very briefly regarding this opinion of Ḥākim v in

Hadyus Sārī. He has also written that although the condition which
Ḥākim v has mentioned can be refuted with regards to the Ṣaḥābah g,
it is valid for those who came after the Ṣaḥābah g. It is for this reason,
there is no aṣl Ḥadīth in Imām Bukhārī’s v book from such a narrator
who only has one student. ‫فليس فی الکتاب حديث أصل من رواية من ليس له إَل راو واحد قط‬
10It becomes known how far from the reality Ḥākim’s v statement is. This is
the academic world. One should not bow to a person simply by looking at his
face [i.e, his reputation]. Rather, his statements should be examined and
scrutinized. If it has passed the test of authenticity, then it is fine. ‫علي الراس‬
‫والعين‬. Otherwise, it is returned with respect. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
155
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS DETAILS OF BUKHĀRĪ’S CONDITIONS
However, Ḥāfiẓ v has erred in this statement because Ḥākim v does not
claim that every narrator of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī and Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim must
have two students. There would have been no objection if Ḥākim v
actually said this because it is an accepted fact that a narrator of a
ṣaḥīḥ Ḥadīth should be free from jahālah. Additionally, it is necessary
to have two narrators to remove jahālah. Therefore, it is necessary for
every narrator (other than the Ṣaḥābah) of a ṣaḥīḥ Ḥadīth in Ṣaḥīḥ
Bukhārī and Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim to be like this.
Ḥākim’s v claim was that every narration in Ṣaḥīḥayn is such that there
are at least two narrators narrating this particular Ḥadīth in every link.
This has been established to be incorrect. Therefore, this is a weak
explanation from Ḥāfiẓ v. Before Ḥāfiẓ v, Ghassānī v and Qāḍī ʿIyāḍ v
also explained Ḥākim’s v claim in this manner. However, Ḥākim’s v
statement does not seem to coincide with this explanation. Kawtharī v
later refuted this opinion. When he refuted this opinion, he referred to
them as: “some people”. It is highly likely that Ibn Ḥajar v is also
included in this group of people which he refutes. And Allāh l knows
best. (See Kawtharī’s marginalia on Shurūṭul Aʾimmah by Ḥāzmī pg. 76)
Details of Imām Bukhārī’s v Conditions
Maqdisī’s v statements regarding the conditions of Imām Bukhārī v

have been mentioned previously. ʿAllāmah Ḥāzimī v has discussed the
conditions in detail. In “Hadyus Sārī”, Ḥāfiẓ v has mentioned a
summary of it. The original (of that summary) with a few additions is
as follows:
1. The chain is muttaṣil (continuous).

2. The narrator is a truthful Muslim.
3. The narrator is not a mudallis.
4. The narrator is not mukhtaliṭ.
5. The narrator is ascribed with the quality of ʿadālah (upright).
6. The narrator is ḍābit (has an excellent retention).
156
7. He remembers well.
8. He is sound-minded.
9. He is qaleelul wahm (makes very few errors).
10. His beliefs are correct.
Ḥāzimī v mentioned: “That person who wishes to collect an authentic
Ḥadīth, should investigate regarding the condition of the ʿ ādil (upright)
narrator and his reliable teachers. This is because some of their
aḥādīth are authentic, and some have been criticised. This is a difficult
matter which can be clarified if the categories of the narrators and
their position in knowledge are identified.” We will mention an
example of this:
There are five categories of Imām Zuhrī’s v students and every

category has a greater virtue than the category below it. The narration
of the narrator in the highest category is the most authentic. This is the
objective of Imām Bukhārī v.
Those in the second category are also ʿādil like those of the first
category. However, in the first category, along with ḥifẓ and itqān, the
narrator was also ascribed with the quality of ṭūl mulāzamat (long
period of companionship) with his teacher to the extent that some
would stay with Imām Zuhrī v both during travels and while at home.
Those in the second category only spent a short time with Zuhrī v.
Thus, they did not gain expertise in Zuhrī’s v aḥādīth as the first group
did. Therefore, in terms of precision, they are placed in a lower
category than the first group. To be in this category is the condition of
Imām Muslim v.
Examples of those in the first category:
1. Yūnus ibn Yazīd

2. ʿUqayl ibn Khālid
3. Mālik ibn Anas
4. Sufyān ibn ʿUyaynah
157
5. Shuʿayb ibn Abī Ḥamzah1‫رحمهم هللا‬
Examples of those in the second category:
1. Awzāʿī
2. Layth ibn Saʿd
3. ʿAbdur Raḥmān ibn Khālid ibn Musāfir
4. Ibn Abī Dhiʾb (Nuʿmān ibn Rāshid has been mentioned instead
of him in “Shurūṭ-e-Ḥāzimī”.) ‫رحمهم هللا‬
Examples of those in the third category:
1. Sufyān ibn Sulaym As-Sulamī

2. Jaʿfar ibn Barqān
3. ʿAbdur Raḥmān ibn ʿUmar ibn Ḥafṣ Al-ʿUmarī v (This name is
not mentioned in “Hadyus Sārī”.)
4. Zamʿah ibn Ṣāliḥ Al-Makkī v (This name is mentioned in the
fourth category in “Hadyus Sārī.”)
This, like the first group, stayed with Imām Zuhrī v for a long time,
however they were not able to stay away from criticism. To be of this
category is Imām Nasāʾī’s v and Imām Abū Dāwūd’s v condition.
Examples of those in the fourth category:
1. Isḥāq ibn Yaḥyā Al-Kalbī

2. Muʿāwiyah ibn Yaḥyā Aṣ-Ṣadafī
3. Isḥāq ibn ʿAbdur Raḥmān ibn Abī Farwah Al Madanī
4. Ibrāhīm ibn Zayd Al Makkī
5. Al-Muthannā ibn uṣ-Ṣabāḥ and others ‫رحمهم هللا‬
Those in this category are similar to those in the third group, i.e., they
have been considered reliable (by some) and have also been criticized
1 This group consists of those who are very thiqah and they have also
accompanied their Shaykh for a long time, i.e., they accompanied him on his
journeys and also stayed with him while at home. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
158
(by some). However, they did stay long in the company of Imām Zuhrī
v. This is Imām Tirmidhī’s v condition. However, since Imām Tirmidhī
v mentions the reason for weakness in a Ḥadīth, the conditions of
Imām Tirmidhī v are more stringent than Imām Abū Dāwūd’s v
conditions.
Examples of those in the fifth category:
1. Baḥr ibn Kathīr-us Saqqā

2. Ḥakam ibn ʿAbdullāh Ad-Daylī
3. ʿAbdul Quddūs ibn Ḥabīb Ad-Dimashqī
4. Muḥammad ibn Saʿīd Al-Maṣlūb and others ‫رحمهم هللا‬
This group consists of many people.
These are the weak and unknown narrators. Imām Abū Dāwūd v and
those lower than him have narrated their narrations as supportive
evidence. Shaykhayn did not narrate from them.
Imām Bukhārī v collected the aḥādīth which are narrated from those in
the first category.2 Sometimes, he would also collect the aḥādīth of
those in the second category which are deemed reliable.
Imām Muslim v narrated from both these categories. Sometimes, he

also collected aḥādīth of those in the third category if it is reliable.
Ḥāfiẓ v said: “Most of the time Imām Bukhārī v mentions the aḥādīth of
those in the second category taʿlīqan. Sometimes he would also bring
aḥādīth from the third category in the taʿlīqāt.” The example we have
mentioned above (of Zuhrī v) is regarding the mukath-thirīn3. Based
on this, the companions of Nāfiʿ, Aʿmash and Qatadah can be
2 That is, those who are ʿādil and they are of the highest calibre with regards to
memory and precision. Additionally, they have also accompanied their Shaykh
for a long period of time. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
3According to the muḥaddithīn, the “mukath-thīrīn” are those whose
narrations are more than one thousand in number. (Taqrīr Tirmidhī Mufī Taqī
ʿUthmānī 1/99) Fazl
159
understood. From among those who are not mukath-thirīn, Shaykhayn

only collected the aḥādīth of those among them who were thiqah, ʿādil
and made very few mistakes. The mufrad and gharīb aḥādīth were also
taken from those who are more reliable among them. For example:
Yaḥyā ibn Saʿīd Anṣārī. The narrations of those from among them who
are not as reliable, are only taken when their narrations coincide with
what has been narrated from others. There are many cases like this.
The Explanation of Mudallisīn
When Ḥāzimī v mentioned these conditions, Kawtharī v makes this

point clear in a footnote that after mentioning the names of the
mudallisīn in his very beneficial book (Jāmiʿut Taḥṣīl li Aḥkāmil
Marāsīl), Ḥāfiẓ Abū Saʿīd Ṣalāḥ-ud-Dīn ʿAlāʾī v wrote that all these
mudallisīn are not on the same level in the context that their ‫معنعن‬
(muʿanʿan) narrations will not be accepted until it is explicitly
mentioned that they heard (directly). Rather, the mudallisīn are of
many categories:
1. Some do such little tadlīs that it is inappropriate to include them

among the mudallisīn. Example: Yaḥyā ibn Saʿīd, Hishām ibn
ʿUrwah and Mūsā ibn ʿUqbah.
The second category are those whom the aʾimmah have accepted their
tadlīs and collected their aḥādīth in their Ṣiḥāḥ, even though they did
not explicitly indicate to have heard (directly). This is due to:
a) Their imāmah.
b) Their tadlīs being very little in proportion to their narrations.
c) They only do tadlīs from reliable narrators4 like Zuhrī, Aʿmash,
Ibrāhīm Nakhʿī, Ismāʿīl ibn Abī Khālid, Sulaymān Taymī, Ḥumayd Ṭawīl,
4 From this category, it becomes known that the Ḥadīth of a mudallis can
sometimes still be accepted even if it is not explicitly mentioned that he heard

(directly). [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
160
Ḥakam ibn ʿUtaybah, Yaḥyā ibn Abī Kathīr, Ibn Jurayj, Thawrī, Ibn
ʿUyaynah, Sharīk and Hushaym.
Many narrations from this group are found in Ṣaḥīḥayn in which it is

not explicitly mentioned that they heard (directly). Some aʾimmah
have said that this is based on the fact that Ṣhaykhayn were aware that
this mudallis heard this specific Ḥadīth (directly) from his Shaykh.
However, it is difficult to accept this reasoning. It is apparent that this

is due to one of the aforementioned reasons.
Furthermore, Kawtharī v mentioned that Ibn Ḥibbān v and Ismāʿīlī v

included Mūsā ibn ʿUqbah among the mudallisīn. Ismāʿīlī v has also
mentioned that although Mūsā did not hear from Zuhrī, his narration is
found in Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī. The narration of Abān ibn ʿUthmān is found in
Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim, while Imām Aḥmad v said that he did not hear from his
father. Ibn Mardawiyah mentions that the narration of Abū Isḥāq
Fazārī from Abū Ṭawālah is found in Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī even though he did
not hear from him. The narration of Zuhrā bin Maʿbad from Ibn ʿUmar
is found in Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī, while Ibn Abī Ḥātim v has remained silent
regarding it. The narration of Sulaym ibn ʿĀmir from Miqdād ibn
Aswad is found in Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim, whereas Abū Ḥātim states that
Sulaym did not meet Miqdād. Imām Aḥmad v mentioned regarding
Shaʿbī, that he did not hear from Abū Hurayrahz, even though his
narration is present in Ṣaḥīḥayn. Many examples of this can be found in
this magnificent book.5
Kawtharī v said: “From this discussion it is known that despite these

narrations being munqaṭiʿ they are accepted due to some other reason.
Similarly, the mursal narrations should also be accepted as is the
madh-hab of the four Imāms and their companions, with little
5Mizzī v said: “.‫” وما يسعنا اَل تحسين الظن‬-“We have no choice but to have good
thoughts.” (Tadrīb 1/116, Hāshiyatul Mūqiẓah pg. 137) Fazl
161
differences in their conditions of it being acceptable,6 even though the

terminology of the later muḥaddithīn is contrary to this. (Shurūṭul Ḥāzimī
pg. 78)
An Example of Inqiṭāʿ in Bukhārī
An example of inqiṭāʿ in Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī is as follows: In Kitābut Tafsīr

2/732 and Kitābuṭ Ṭalāq 2/796, the chain of one narration is as
follows:
.‫هشام عن ابن جريج وقال عطاء عن ابن عباس الخ‬
There is an objection on this that Ibn Jurayj v did not hear from ʿAṭāʾ
Khurāsānī v. Rather, he narrated from a book he received from
ʿUthmān (the son of ʿAṭāʾ) v. ʿUthmān v is a weak narrator and ʿAṭāʾ
Khurāsānī v did not hear from Ibn ʿAbbāsh. Thus, the narration is
munqaṭiʿ.
In reply to this, Ḥāfiẓ Ṣāḥib v mentioned that it is possible that Ibn

Jurayj v heard this narration from both ʿAṭāʾ Khurāsānī v and ʿAṭāʾ ibn
6 What is a mursal narration? A mursal narration is one in which a Tābiʿī

mentions a statement or action of Nabī n without mentioning the name of a
Ṣaḥābī. There is a difference of opinion regarding this. The Aḥnāf, Mālikiyyah
and Ḥanābilah (the preferred opinion of Imām Aḥmad v) accepts them, while
the Shawāfiʿ do not accept them. However, the Shawāfiʿ do accept them, with a
slight difference in the conditions of acceptance. (This is ʿAllāmah Kawtharī’s
v interpretation). It is mentioned in some books that Imām Shāfiʿī v was the
first to reject the mursal Ḥadīth as a proof, everyone before him accepted it as
evidence. The muḥaddithīn today, like ‘rain frogs’, simply write: ‫–ضعيف َلرساله‬
‘it is weak due to being mursal’. Albānī etc. wrote it like this. Why is it weak?
Because it is mursal. So, throw it into the waste basket. There are also
separate books regarding using mursal Ḥadīth as evidence, even though the
terminology of the later muḥaddithīn is contrary to this. Rather, they are re-
defining the term. The mujtahid Imāms based their deductions of rulings on
their definition and passed on, and their fiqh was compiled. Now, who can
bring them back from their graves and say to them: “Come, we have made new
principles, you can re-formulate your fiqh.” [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
162
Abī Rabāḥ v. Imām Bukhārī v mentioned the narration assuming it to

be from ʿAṭāʾ ibn Abī Rabbāḥ v. Ḥāfiẓ v then wrote: “This is such a
matter that giving a clear answer is quite difficult.” ‫وَلبُدَّ للجواد من كبوة‬.
(Every racehorse has to slip.) 7(Hadyus Sārī pg. 375)
An example of Iḍtirāb
In Kitābudh Dhabāʾih 2/827, there is a narration of Nāfiʿ v. Sometimes,

he narrates this Ḥadīth from the son of Kaʿb ibn Mālik, sometimes from
an Anṣārī and sometimes from a man from Banū Salamah. Dārquṭnī v
mentions that there are considerable amount of ikhtilāf (differences)
in this narration and Imām Bukhārī v collected it.
Ḥāfiẓ v mentions that its ʿillah (defect) is clear and the answer is
difficult. (Hadyus Sārī pg. 376) Then, Ḥāfiẓ v gave no answer.
7 From this discussion it is understood that there are muʿanʿan narrations

from mudallis narrators in Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī. You can interpret it with ḥusn
iʿtiqād (having good thoughts) and accept it, yet it contradicts the principle.
The principle is that the muʿanʿan of a mudallis is not accepted until it is not
explicitly stated that he heard clearly from that narrator. However, there are
many exceptions to this principle found in Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī and Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim.
When you are aware of this principle, and you are using a mursal Ḥadīth as
evidence and a ghayr muqallid says to you: “This is weak.” You should ask
him: “Who said this is weak?” “Are the muʿanʿan narrations of a mudallis also
weak? If yes, then Imām Bukhārī v and Imām Muslim v collect them. What
answer will you give to this?” This is why it is important to learn Uṣūl Ḥadīth.
If the ghayr muqallids were to be debated, the Mawlvīs of today will join the
debate like bleating sheep. Like a ‘wet cat’, they will say “We did not study
takhaṣṣuṣ (of Ḥadīth) (therefore we do not have an answer).” This is why
“Hadiyyatud Darārī” is for this.
‫وَلبد للجواد من كبوة‬: This is an Arabic proverb: “Even the best of the Arabian
horses sometimes stumbles and falls, sometimes it falls without stumbling.”
The same answer is given here, Imām Bukhārī v made a mistake, he slipped
and fell. Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī is not like the Qurʾān. There is a huge difference
between Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī and the Noble Qurʾān. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
163
An Important Question and Answer
After mentioning the conditions of the aʾimmah, ʿAllāmah Ḥāzimī v

raises an objection and mentions its answer8:
Question:
If Shaykhayn ‫ رحمهما هللا‬made it binding to only collect ṣaḥīḥ aḥādīth, why

did they mention narrations of such narrators who have been criticised
such as Fulayḥ ibn Sulaymān, ʿAbdur Raḥmān ibn ʿAbdillāh ibn Dinār,
Ismāʿīl ibn Abī Uways in Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī, and Muḥammad ibn Isḥāq ibn
Yasār and others like him in Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim?
Answer:
Imām Bukhārī v and Imām Muslim v have accepted the narration of

few narrators to whom weakness has been ascribed, however, this
weakness is not to such a level which causes their narrations to be
rejected. Apart from this, we also say and agree that Imām Bukhārī v
does not consider it correct to collect the aḥādīth of weak narrators in
his Ṣaḥīḥ. Regarding those narrators who are ascribed with weakness,
if that weakness was considered reliable according to Imām Bukhārī v,
he would not have accepted their narrations in his Ṣaḥīḥ.9
It is worth noting at this point, that there are various reasons for
weakness. The scholars differ in this regard. According to the fuqahāʾ,
8This has been briefly mentioned previously. Here, we mention it with some
more details, along with some points in favour of the Ḥanafīs. It is for this
reason that it is being repeated. ‫اذا تكرر تقرر في ذهن السامعين حتي الغافلين‬. “When it is
repeated, it becomes firm in the minds of the listeners, even the neglectful .”
9This is a very beneficial discussion. From this it is known that narrators
being reliable or weak is an ijṭihādī matter in which there are difference of
opinion. This is not any definite matter from Allāh l. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
164
the reasons for weakness are fixed and they are mainly according to
the apparent rulings of the Sharīʿah. According to the aʾimmah of
riwāyah, the reasons for weakness are other than that and the fuqahāʾ
do not consider them correct. Then, there is also a huge difference of
opinion among the scholars of naql. One narrator would be considered
trustworthy according to ʿAbdur Raḥmān ibn Mahdī, while according
to another Imām, for example Yaḥyā ibn Saʿīd, he would be criticized
and vice versa, even though both of them are such scholars of jarḥ and
taʿdīl, who form the foundation of naql and statements are mainly
narrated from them.
As for Imām Bukhārī v, he was unmatched in his time. There was none
of his likes in the fields of discussion and criticism. After knowing his
status, an objection cannot be made against him. He is able to say: “I
made it binding on myself to mention those aḥādīth whose ṣiḥḥat
(authenticity) is agreed upon. I did not make it binding on myself that I
will mention the aḥādīth of such narrators whose ʿadālah is agreed
upon because this is impossible. Different people have different
reasons for considering a person weak.”
Additionally, a specific Ḥadīth may be considered established by Imām

Bukhārī v and it has different chains. Sometimes he gives preference to
the nuzūl (longer chain)10 and thus, he would leave out the most
authentic chain and choose the nuzūl. Sometimes he would do this to
prevent repetition. There can be various other reasons for doing such.
Imām Muslim v has mentioned this clearly. (Shurūṭul Aʾimmah by Ḥāzimī pg.
83, 84)
Some Important Notes
10 Meaning, one of the narrators may be mutakallam fīhi (criticized), however,

this Ḥadīth is narrated from a higher and more authentic chain in which there
is no weak narrator. Therefore, the Ḥadīth is ṣaḥīḥ but a mutakallam fīhi
narrator comes in the nāzil sanad (lower chain). This is what is meant by this.
165
From this question and answer, some important points are derived
which Kawtharī v has indicated towards. One great benefit is that jarḥ
and taʿdīl, grading narrators authentic or weak and also grading Ḥadīth
authentic or weak are all matters that are ijtihādī. For this reason,
there are always differences, as is apparent from the differences of
opinion of the earlier aʾimmah of jarḥ and taʿdīl. There are discussions
(criticism) regarding many of the narrators of Ṣaḥīḥayn. Eighty (80) in
Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī alone, one hundred and sixty (160) in Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim
alone and many more in both of them together. The reasons for
criticism are as follows: bidʿah, jahālah, errors, mukhālafah (of thiqah)
or tadlīs and irsāl.11 The answer to all these objections have been
mentioned. These narrators are brought either as mutābiʿāt and
shawāhid or this narration was collected before the narrator became
mukhtaliṭ or because of a high chain. The aṣl (primary) Ḥadīth is
established from another ṣaḥīḥ chain or this weakness is not
established according to Shaykhayn ‫رحمهما هللا‬. Ḥāfiẓ v mentioned an
answer to this with details in “Hadyus Sārī”, the introduction of “Fatḥul
Bārī”.
There is criticism regarding two hundred and ten (210) aḥādīth of

Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī and Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim. There are seventy-eight (78) in Ṣaḥīḥ
Bukhārī alone, one hundred (100) in Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim alone and in both of
them there are thirty-two (32). Different reasons for criticism have
been mentioned. Ḥāfiẓ Ṣāḥib v gave the detailed answer in the
introduction of Fatḥul Bārī. Before the detailed answer a concise
answer was written. A summary of this is as follows:
11 If you remember what you read in “Sharḥ Nukhbah”, you would know that
there are ten reasons for criticism: five regarding ʿadālah (uprightness) and
five regarding ḍabṭ (memory and precision). [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
166
Imām Bukhārī v and Imām Muslim v were the greatest Imāms of their
time.12 They had the knowledge of ʿAlī ibn Madīnī v and Dhuhalī v.
They collected such aḥādīth in their Ṣaḥīḥs which are free from hidden
defects. If there are any hidden defects, then according to both of them,
it does not affect it (the authenticity of the Ḥadīth). If the critics’
criticism was accepted, the most that can be said is that the critics’
criticism contradicts the research of Shaykhayn ‫رحمهما هللا‬. It is clear that in
such a situation preference will be given to the opinion of Shaykhayn
‫رحمهما هللا‬. In this manner, the objection would be dismissed. (Hadyus Sārī pg.
274)
Ibn Humām’s v Conclusion13
From this, the researcher, Ibn Humām v concluded that if Imām

Bukhārī v and Muslim v both consider a specific narrator to be the
embodiment of all the conditions of authenticity, then this is not
definite. Rather it is possible that his decision is contrary to reality.
Imām Muslim v narrated from many narrators who have been
criticised. Similarly, there are mutakallam fīhi narrators in Ṣaḥīḥ
Bukhārī. This is why the issue of narrators revolves around the ijtihād
of the scholars. This is also the case regarding the conditions ( shurūṭ).
There are also differences of opinion regarding this. One condition may
be necessary according to one scholar, whereas another condition is
necessary for another scholar. Yes, it is true that the non-mujtahid rely
on what most agree on. As for the mujtahid, who is independent with
12Commenting on this, the Aḥnāf will say: “If such is said regarding Imām
Bukhārī v and Imām Muslim v due to their high status, should such not be
said regarding the aʾimmah arbaʿah, when they are their (Imām Bukhārī v and
Imām Muslim’s v) teachers or teacher’s teachers. Their (aʾimmah arbaʿah’s)
status in fiqh and Ḥadīth is agreed upon. (See: Introduction of Lāmiʿ pg. 73
(handwritten) or pg. 268 (typed), and the introduction of Inʿāmul Bārī 2/40)
13Even today, on hearing Ibn Humām’s v conclusion many people gnash their
teeth (grind their teeth in anger). It would be said to them: “Bring forth an
answer, “‫( ” ُموتُوا ِبغَ ْي ِظكُ ْم‬perish in your rage). What will be the outcome of your
anger? [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
167
regards to considering or not considering a condition [as valid] and

who has inspected and assessed the narrator and narration himself, he
will act on his own opinion (Shaykhayn’s opinion cannot be imposed
on him). Therefore, a ṣaḥīḥ narration from other than the Ṣaḥīḥayn
may contradict the narration of Ṣaḥīḥayn.14 (Fatḥul Qadīr 1/317,3/186)
Ibn Amīr Ḥāj v stated in his commentary of “At-Taḥrīr”, “At-Taqrīr wat

Taḥrīr”: “It should be known that Ṣaḥīḥayn is regarded as the most
authentic only in comparison to those that came after them, not in
comparison to the mujtahidīn who came before them15. Even though
14 This statement affects many people.

This following point which is mentioned in “Sharḥ Nukhbah” or “Muqaddamah
Ibn Ṣalāḥ”, that the narrations of Ṣaḥīḥayn are superior to all other narrations,
is a belief and principle which was formulated later. In the era of the aʾimmah
arbaʿah’s mujtahidīn, Ṣaḥīḥayn did not exist. We say: “The authentic
narrations of ghayr Ṣaḥīḥayn can contradict the Ṣaḥīḥayn. If there is one ṣaḥīḥ
Ḥadīth in Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī and Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim and one ṣaḥīḥ Ḥadīth in Jāmiʿ
Tirmidhī, we consider both these aḥādīth to be on the same level. We then
bring an external reason for preference. Consider the following examples of
rafaʿ yadayn and tark rafaʿ yadayn so that this is understood clearly. The
aḥādīth regarding rafaʿ yadayn are from Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī and Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim. The
aḥādīth of tark rafaʿ yadayn are from Jāmiʿ Tirmidhī and Sunan Abū Dawūd
and they are also ṣaḥīḥ according to us. We are responsible for stipulating
conditions of authenticity. We have conditions for authenticity, and we also
establish principles for the conditions of authenticity. We do not follow Imām
Bukhārī v regarding this. Both these aḥādīth are ṣaḥīḥ and both are
established from Nabī n. It is for this reason we bring an external reason for
preference and give preference to one of them. If there is an external reason
for preference by which it becomes known that the Ḥadīth of Sunan Abū
Dāwūd and Jāmiʿ Tirmidhī are worthy of being given preference, we will give
it preference. You cannot frighten us by saying: “There is a saḥīḥ Ḥadīth
contradicting us. How can you leave out ṣaḥīḥ aḥādīth?” We say: “The ṣaḥīḥ
aḥādīth of ghayr Ṣaḥīḥayn can contradict those in Ṣaḥīḥayn.” This is how
splendid the research of the author of “Fatḥul Qadīr” is. Ibn Humām v
mentions this in two places in “Fatḥul Qadīr”: 1/317 and 3/182. [Extracted from
Ifādātush Shaykh]
15 Remember this well and say this firmly. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
168
this is quite clear, some people are still unaware of it, or they are
mistaken.16
ʿAllāmah Kawtharī v mentioned in the commentary of this that

Shaykhayn ‫ رحمهما هللا‬and their contemporaries and the authors of the
Sunans, came after the compilation of Islāmic jurisprudence and they
collected only specific types of aḥādīth. The aʾimmah mujtahidīn before
them had more resources. Along with marfūʿ aḥādīth they had mawqūf
and mursal aḥādīth, and also the fatāwā of the Saḥābah g and Tābiʿīn.
They were not only looking at one type of Ḥadīth. This can be seen
from the books compiled by the students of these mujtahid Imāms or
the students of their students.17 It was easy for these Imāms to
research the chains of the aḥādīth due to their high status (being of
such an early generation), especially when it is accepted that a Ḥadīth
being used as evidence (for a ruling) is its authentication18. (Hāshiyah
Kawtharī on Ḥāzimī pg. 83)
Mawlānā Ẓafar Aḥmad ʿUthmanī’s v Discourse
16We will say that we will take benefit from the pious, ignorant ones. These
are our researchers; they are publicizing it to everyone. If the Salafīs of today
were to hear this, they would become angry and would think that Qiyāmah
has arrived. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
17For example: look at “Muwaṭṭāʾ”, then “Kitābul Āthār” of Imām Ṣāḥib v.
Additionally, look at “Muṣannaf Ibn ʿAbdur Razzāq” and “Muṣannaf Ibn Abī
Shaybah”. These books do not only have marfūʿ aḥādīth. Along with marfūʿ,
there are also lots of mawqūf and maqṭūʿ aḥādīth. This is also the style of
Imām Ṭaḥāwī v. The name of his book is “Sharḥ Maʿāniul Āthār”, but āthār is
not only used for marfūʿ ḥadīth. It is also used for mawqūf and munqaṭiʿ
aḥādīth, i.e, the statements of the Ṣaḥābah g and Tābiʿīn. [Extracted from Ifādātush
Shaykh]
18When a mujtahid uses a Ḥadīth as evidence, it means that he considers it
worthy of being used as a proof, otherwise if it was not worthy of acceptance,
he would not have used it to derive rulings. At that time there were no
differences of opinion, this came afterwards. This is ʿAllamāh Kawtharī v.
169
Mawlānā Ẓafar Aḥmad ʿUthmanī v has a separate chapter in the

introduction of “Iʿlāʾ us Sunan” (“Qawāʿid fi ʿUlūmil Ḥadīth”) titled:
‘The grading of narrators reliable or weak and grading of aḥādīth as
authentic or weak is an ijtihādī matter.’ To establish this principle, he
then mentions the text of Ibn Taymiyyah v, Ibn Jarīr v, Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar
v, Imām Suyūṭī v, Imām Tirmidhī v and ʿAllāmah Dhahabī v. (See
Muqaddamah Iʿlāʾ us Sunan pg. 33 onwards)
Summary of the Discussion
The summary of the discussion is that in Ṣaḥīḥayn, Shaykhayn ‫رحمهما‬

‫هللا‬has necessitated authenticity based on their conditions.19 One should
not object against this. If in some instances, reasons for weakness are
found, it does not affect the authenticity of these books.
Kawtharī v mentioned: “If there is some form of criticism on these two

books, the high status of these two books is not lowered by this
criticism. After all, they were also human beings. They were not free
from making errors.” It is also known that Imām Bukhārī v departed
this world before he did the final edit of his book as was previously
explained in Abul Walīd Bājī’s v discussion. (See ‘The Objective of Compiling
Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī’- pg.156, 157 and pg. 164)
Awhām (Mistakes) in Bukhārī
There are also awhām a few places in Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī. Commentators

and annotators have drawn attention to this. Ḥazrat Shaykh
Muḥammad Zakariyyā v counted fifty (50) awhām and he has writen
that a commentary of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī, “At Tawḍīḥ lil Awhāmil Wāqiʿah
fiṣ Ṣaḥīḥ” is mentioned in “Kashfuẓ Ẓunūn”. This commentary was
written by Aḥmad ibn Ibrāhīm ibn Sabṭ Al- Ḥalabī v (death: 884 A.H.).
He has compiled the awhām from the commentaries of Ibn Ḥajar v,
19 We also show great reverence to Ṣaḥīḥayn. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
170
Kirmānī v and Barmādī v. (See Kashfuẓ Ẓunūn 1/553 and Muqaddamah Lāmiʿ pg.
73)
The Valuable Insight of the Author of “Anwārul Bārī”
Mawlānā Sayyid Aḥmad Raḍā Bijnorī v, author of “Anwārul Bārī”,

penned a very fine work on this subject. He has written: “After all
Imām Bukhārī v was also a human being. His status is not degraded by
a few errors and mistakes. Rather, in this regard, his status is elevated
even higher. If there were any deficiencies, whether concerning the
narrations or the narrators, in the form of error or repetition of
aḥādīth, the other muḥaddithīn have criticized it in a straightforward,
humble manner and they were not afraid of Imām Bukhārī’s v
distinguished status.20 After these weaknesses are affirmed, the value
and esteem of (the remainder of) the entire book increases. Those
narrations which are weak due to a weak narrator, became strong due
to the mutābiʿāts.” (Muqaddamah Anwārul Bārī 2/44)
Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī: The Most Authentic Book
It has been mentioned previously under the ‘Specialities of Bukhārī’

that this book is the most authentic book after the Book of Allāh l (the
Qurʾān), after which is Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim and thereafter, the other books.
Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar v quotes the following from Shaykh ibn Ṣalāḥ v in the
introduction of “Fatḥul Bārī”: “The scholars have agreed on the fact
that Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī is ranked higher than Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim with regards to
authenticity.” Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim being the most authentic is not established
from the following statement which has been narrated from teacher,
Ḥāfiẓ Abū ʿAlī Nayshāpūrī v:
20This is because this is the academic world. We do not prevent ourselves

from objecting by looking at the status of someone. We do not submit and
accept every statement of so and so person simply due to his renowned status.
In the academic world, this is not accepted. Rather, each and every statement
of such a person is examined. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
171
"‫"ما تحت أديم السماء كتاب أصح من كتاب مسلم بن الحجاج‬
“Under the skies, there is no book more authentic than the book of Muslim ibn
Ḥajjāj.”
This statement does not establish that Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim is more authentic
(than Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī). Rather, the most that can be established is
equality (being on the same level as Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī). However, this
necessitates negating that Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī is the most authentic. The
reply to this is that Abū ʿAlī Nayshāpūrī’s v Shaykh, Imām Abū ʿAbdur-
Raḥmān Nasāʾī v also said: “From among all these books, there is no
book better (ajwad) than the book of Muḥammad ibn Ismāʿīl.” The
word ‘jūwdah’, is apparently referring to the asānīd (chains). Imām
Nasāʾī v is known for grading the narrators with extreme caution. One
group of the aḥādīth experts, ranked him higher than Imām Muslim v
in the field of Ḥadīth. Dārquṭnī v gave preference to Nasāʾī v over Ibn
Khuzaymah v. It is for this reason, the statement of Imām Nasāʾī v is
preferred over the statement of Abū ʿAlī Nayshāpūrī v.
Muḥaddith Ismāʿilī v in his book, “Al-Madkhal” stated: “Other people

also wrote books according to the style of Imām Bukhārī v. Imām
Muslim v, who was from the same era as Imām Bukhārī v, is also
amongst them. He benefitted from Imām Bukhārī v and his books.
However, Imām Muslim v did not establish such stringent conditions
which Imām Bukhārī v adopted. Bukhārī v did not collect the
narrations of many people from whom Imām Muslim v collected
narrations from. Each of their intentions were correct. However, no
one can reach the tashaddud (stringency) of Imām Bukhārī v….”
Imām Ḥākim Abū Aḥmad Nayshāpūrī v, the contemporary of Abū ʿAlī

Nayshāpūrī v, who is more proficient than him with regards to the
knowledge of the condition of narrators (maʿrifatur rijāl) also
mentioned that those who wrote books after Imām Bukhārī v
172
benefitted from Imām Bukhārī’s v books like Muslim ibn Ḥajjāj

Qushayrī v.
When Ṣaḥīḥayn was mentioned to Dārquṭnī v, he said:

“‫”لوَل البخارى لما ذهب مسلم وَلجاء‬. (“If not for Bukhārī, Muslim would have
never come and go.”) Sometimes, he said: “What did Muslim do? He
took Bukhārī’s book, prepared his mustakhraj and made some
additions to it.”21
Imām Muslim v himself was of the opinion that Imām Bukhārī v was of
a higher rank and calibre. In the famous incident, he left Imām Dhuhalī
v due to his respect and regard for Imām Bukhārī v. There are many
statements similar to this from the aʾimmah. From all of them,
weakness of Abū ʿAlī Nayshāpūrī’s v statement is apparent.
Some of the Maghribī scholars (mainly Abū Muḥammad Ibn Ḥazm)

have mentioned that the book of Imām Muslim v is better than Imām
Bukhārī’s v book. This does not mean that Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim is more
authentic than Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī because the word ṣiḥḥat (authenticity)
was not used. Rather, the reason for stating that Imām Muslim’s v book
is better than Imām Bukhārī’s v is because the statements of the
Ṣaḥābah g and Tābiʿīn are not mentioned along with the marfūʿ aḥādīth
in Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim. After the khuṭbah, he began listing the marfūʿ aḥādīth.
On the other hand, there are muʿallaq aḥādīth as well as mawqūf and
maqṭūʿ narrations in Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī’s tarājim. Alternatively, it means
that the arrangement and order of Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim is excellent. All of the
narrations are mentioned with its variations and varying chains in one
place. On the other hand, in Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī, the narrations are
shortened, separated and scattered in portions throughout the book. If
this statement does mean that Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim is better than Ṣaḥīḥ
Bukhārī with regards to authenticity, this statement is rejected because
This is not a good statement even though it was made by Dārquṭnī. Imām
21
Muslim v is degraded by this. This statement is worthy of being criticised.

173
this statement goes against the proofs. (Hayus Sārī pg. 10-13 and Sharḥ
Nukhbah pg. 29)
Muḥaddith ʿAbdur Raḥmān Yamanī Shāfiʿī v mentioned two poems

regarding this:22
:‫ى فقالوا‬
ِّ َ‫لد‬ ‫تنازعَ قوم فی البخاری ومسلم‬
‫ى ذَين يُقدِّم‬
ِّ ‫أ‬
‫کما فاقَ فی حسن الصناعة المسلم‬ ً‫ی صحة‬

ُّ ‫لقد فا َق البخار‬: ُ‫فقلت‬
A group disputed regarding Bukhārī and Muslim,
In my presence. They said: Which one do you prefer?
I said: Bukhārī has excelled in authenticity,
Like how Muslim has surpassed in beautiful style.
(Muqaddamah of Dars-e-Bukhārī by Mawlānā Shabbir Aḥmad ʿUthmānī, pg. 10 and

Wa mā Yanfaʿun Nās pg. 45)
A Further Discussion on the Statement of Abū ʿAlī Nayshāpūrī v
It becomes known from Imām Nawawī’s v discussion that Abū ʿAlī

Nayshāpūrī v and some Maghāribah consider Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim to be more
authentic than Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī. Nawawī’s v words are as follows:
‫ انتهى كالمه في مقدمة شرح‬.‫ صحيح مسلم أصح‬:‫وقال أبو علي النيسابورى وبعض علماء المغرب‬
.‫ وفى مختصره فى علوم الحديث‬٣٩ ‫البخارى له ص‬
(Muqaddamah Sharḥ Bukhārī pg. 39 and also in his Mukhtaṣar fī ʿUlūmil Ḥadīth)
22In my presence, some people have begun debating regarding Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī
and Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim. Which is superior? I said: “Listen to the verdict. With
regards to authenticity, Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī is superior and with regards to its
beautiful arrangement and style, Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim is superior.” [Extracted from Ifādātush
Shaykh]
174
Ḥāfiẓ v mentioned that this is not what is meant by Abū ʿAlī’s v

statement. It is also possible that by his statement, he intended that
they are equal in authenticity. I have understood that Abū ʿAlī
Nayshāpūrī v has given Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim virtue over Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī for
reasons other than the conditions for authenticity. Imām Muslim v
wrote his book in his city with his ʿuṣūl (written copy) before him in
the lifetime of many mashāyikh. Therefore, caution could be taken
when mentioning the words of the aḥādīth and in light of this, rulings
were not derived as was done in Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī. Thus, all the variations
and chains were combined and compiled together and he only sufficed
on marfūʿ aḥādīth. He did not consider the mawqūf narrations except
in a few instances. Even then, it was mentioned for support and not as
the aṣl (primary evidence). Imām Bukhārī’s v objective was to derive
rulings. It is for this reason that he included chapters and mentioned
portions of the aḥādīth. It is from this angle that Abū ʿAlī v has given
preference to Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim. I have seen that some of the aʾimmah say
that it is possible that Abū ʿAlī v did not see Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī. However, in
my opinion, that this is a far-fetched claim. The more correct reasoning
is that which I have mentioned. If Abū ʿAlī v explicitly explained that
Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim is higher in rank than Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī based on
authenticity, his opinion will be refuted with the aforementioned
evidence. (Hadyus Sārī pg. 12)
Mawlānā Rashīd Nuʿmānī v stated that Ḥāfiẓ Dhahabī v mentioned the

following words from Ibn Mundah v with a continuous chain:
.‫ ما تحت أديم السماء أصح من كتاب مسلم‬:‫سمعتُ أبا على النيسابورى يقول وما رأيتُ أحفظَ منه‬
“I heard Abū ʿAlī Nayshāpūrī saying, ‘I have not seen anyone with a better
retention than him. There is no book under the skies more authentic than
Muslim’s book.’”
(Tadhkiratul Ḥuffaẓ, Tadhkirah Abū ʿAlī Ḥusayn ibn ʿAlī Nayshāpūrī)
The way in which Ibn Mundah v narrated his statement shows that he
is also of the same opinion. Abū ʿAlī Nayshāpūrī’s v opinion regarding
175
Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim being the most authentic book has been transmitted very
clearly. Nothing as explicit as this has been transmitted from any of the
mutaqaddimīn regarding Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī being the most authentic. Yes,
Imām Nasāʾī v made a statement regarding this (i.e., Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī
being the most authentic). However, it is not explicit in proving that it
is the most authentic (because he used the word ‘ajwad’). From the
word, ‘ajwad’, it is possible that he is referring to the subject matter
being ‘ajwad’ (most excellent) even though, according to Ḥāfiẓ v, it
refers to the jūdah (excellence and authenticity) of the chains.
However, since there are both possibilities, this word is not explicit in
proving that it is the most authentic. It is important to note that Imām
Nasāʿi v has included a few of the narrations of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī in
“Kitābuḍ-Ḍuʿafāʾ wal Matrūkīn”. Additionally, he graded the following
Ḥadīth of Ibn ʿUmarh, which has been narrated in Ḥammād ibn Shākir’s
nuskhah, as mawḍūʿ (fabricated):‫ كيف بك اذا عمرتَ بين قوم يحبون رزق سنة‬. (Ibn
Mājah aur ʿIlm Ḥadīth pg. 116)
However, in light of the evidence, the mutakh-khirīn (later scholars)

accepted Bukhārī as the most authentic. This issue has become
unanimous. And Allāh l knows best.
Ḥāfiẓ v has also narrated the same words which Mawlānā Nuʿmānī v
quoted from Dhahabī’s v “Tadhkiratul Ḥuffāẓ”. How can one claim that
it is clearly understood from this statement that Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim is the
most authentic when it is also possible that Abū ʿAlī v considered both
Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī and Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim to be on the same level of
authenticity? If such is the case, it would be correct to say: “There is no
book more authentic than Muslim under the skies.” So, ponder upon
this!
Ṣanʿānī’s Refutation
In “Tawḍīḥul Afkār”, Ṣanʿānī v refuted Ḥāfiẓ v and wrote: “If someone

says: “‫”ما تحت أديم السماءأعلم من فالن‬- “There is none, under the skies, more
knowledgeable than so-and-so”, according to customary usage (ʿurf)
176
this usually means that so-and-so is the greatest scholar and there is no
one equal to him. Yes, from the grammatical angle, there is the
possibility of someone being equal to him as Ḥāfiẓ v mentioned.
However, the ʿurfī meaning is given precedence when praise and
exaggeration is intended. (It is for this reason the following meaning is
accepted: Abū ʿAlī v considered Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim to be more authentic
than Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī.) (Ḥāshiyatun Nukat pg. 284)
A Note of Caution
It is important to note that Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī being the most authentic

does not mean that each Ḥadīth of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī is given preference
over all the aḥādīth in Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim. Rather, Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī is the most
authentic after a full survey as Zarakshī v and other researchers have
clarified and explained. Similarly, the Ṣaḥīḥayn being the most
authentic also means that overall, these two books are given virtue
over the other books. Thus, it is possible that a Ḥadīth is only in Ṣaḥīḥ
Muslim, however, it is narrated through various chains. Hence, it is
given virtue over Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī’s mufrad Ḥadīth. Similarly, if there is
such a Ḥadīth which is ṣaḥīḥ and it is not mentioned in the Ṣaḥīḥayn,
however, its chain is one of the most ṣaḥīḥ chains, then it is given
virtue over that narration which is only in Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī and Ṣaḥīḥ
Muslim specifically when there is a mutakallam fīhi narrator in the
narration of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī and Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim. (See the introduction of Fatḥul
Mulhim pg. 95 and 107 and Sharḥ Nukhbah pg. 33)23
Ibn Kathīr v said: “In “Musnad Aḥmad”, there are various chains and
texts which are on the same level as the aḥādīth of not only Ṣaḥīḥ
Muslim but also Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī.24Furthermore, these aḥādīth are not
23This statement of Zarakshī v is similar to Ibn Humām’s statement v which

was mentioned previously, i.e, “The ṣaḥīḥ aḥādīth of ghayr Ṣaḥīḥayn can rival
the aḥādīth of Ṣaḥīḥayn.” [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
Some aḥādīth of “Musnad Aḥmad” are better than Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī and Ṣaḥīḥ
24
Muslim’s aḥādīth. Hence, the virtue (of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī and Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim)
177
mentioned in the Ṣaḥīḥayn nor the Sunan Arbaʿah.” (Al-Bāʿīthul Ḥathīth25

pg. 24)
This supports Ibn Humām’s v statement which was mentioned

previously. The statement is as follows: The authentic aḥādīth of ghayr
Ṣaḥīḥayn can be equal to the aḥādīth of Ṣaḥīḥayn. In Sunan Ibn Mājah,
there are many aḥādīth which are more authentic than the aḥādīth in
Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī. (See Ibn Mājah aur ʿIlm Ḥadīth pg. 242)
Who Are ‘Some of the Maghāribah’?
Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī’s virtue over Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim has not been mentioned from
any of the mashāyikh of Maghrib with regards to ṣiḥat (authenticity).
Yes, it is narrated in general. Ḥāfiẓ v states that in “Al-Ilmāʾ”, Qāḍī ʿIyāḍ
v narrates from Abū Marwān Ṭubnī v that some of their mashāyikh
considered Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim to be more virtuous than Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī. I
have found the details of this from some of the Maghāribah. In Abū
Muḥammad Qāsim ibn Qāsim Tajībī’s v index, I read that Abū
Muḥammad ibn Ḥazam v considered the book of Imām Muslim v to be
more virtuous than the book of Imām Bukhārī v because in Ṣaḥīḥ
Muslim after the khuṭbah, only aḥādīth are mentioned. I think that this
Ibn Ḥazam v is the Shaykh of Abū Marwān Ṭubnī v who Qāḍī ʿIyaḍ v
did not specify. It is possible that it could be someone else. However,
both of their statements would mean the same.
Dārquṭnī’s v contemporary, Muslamah ibn Qāsim Qurṭubī v made a

similar statement. Regarding Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim, he said: “‫”لم يضع أحد مثلها‬, -
“No one has written a book like this.” This can also mean that no one
which is mentioned is regarding the entire book and not each individual
Ḥadīth. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
25Al-Bāʿīthul Ḥathīth: This is the abridged version of “Muqaddamah Ibn Ṣalāḥ”
compiled by Ibn Kathīr v. Its original title is: “Mukhtaṣar ʿUlūm-ul-Ḥadīth”.
Other people have also penned annotations for it. Aḥmad Shākir v has also
written one and it is this one which is published by the title: “Al-Bāʿīthul
Ḥathīth”. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
178
has written a book in such a good style and order. I have seen many
Maghāribah like ʿAbdul Ḥaq who mentioned aḥādīth without their
chains in the books of aḥkām (laws). In those books he relied on Ṣaḥīḥ
Muslim and not on Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī because in Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim the full
matn (text) can be found, whereas Imām Bukhārī v only mentioned
portions of the matn. It is clear that this has nothing to do with
authenticity. (Hadyus Sārī pg. 13)
Ḥāfiẓ v said: “If Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim is more virtuous due to this factor26, then
in comparison to it, Bukhārī Sharīf is more virtuous due to the
following reasons: difficulties are removed by reading it and when it is
with a person on a journey by sea, the boat does not sink as Ibn Abī
Jamrah narrated from the Ahl Faḍl.” He further stated that Imām
Bukhārī v was mustajāb-ud-daʿwāt (i.e., his supplications were
accepted). He supplicated for its reciter. Similarly, the tarājim of Ṣaḥīḥ
Bukhārī has this virtue that its taḥwīl and tabyīḍ (editing) was done by
Imām Bukhārī v between the grave and the pulpit of Nabī n.
Additionally, he would offer two rakʿahs for every tarjumāh. It is for
this reason, the tarjumāh is mind boggling and people are amazed by it.
Criticism of Dārquṭnī’s Statement
The following statement of Dārquṭnī v appears to be impolite and

inappropriate for the status of Imām Muslim v: “What has Muslim
26 Meaning, (it is more virtuous because) its order is very good and only
marfūʿ aḥādīth are mentioned. There are very few ghayr marfūʿ narrations.
Ḥāfiẓ v does not like that Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim is given preference to Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī in
any aspect. Thus, Ḥāfiẓ v has not remained silent regarding this. To refute this,
he has compiled so many virtues of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī so that the status of Bukhārī
remains with Bukhārī. This is being faithful (to Bukhārī). However, the reality
is that Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim does possess some virtues and Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī possesses
many virtues. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
179
done? He has made a few additions to Bukhārī’s book and did istikhrāj
(narrated those Ḥadīth with his personal chains).” This is an impolite
and rude statement to make regarding Imām Muslim v.
Mawlānā Muḥammad ʿAbdur Rashīd Nuʿmānī v mentioned that Ḥāfiẓ v

is drowned in being faithful to Bukhārī v. Thus, he has not mentioned
anything regarding this. Abū Aḥmad Ḥākim Nayshāpūrī v (death: 287
A.H.), who is famous by the name Ḥākim Kabīr, and whose opinion has
been mentioned previously also stated: “The “Tārīkh” which Imām
Muslim v has written is also written word for word from Imām
Bukhārī’s “Tārīkh”; only a few additions have been made which can be
easily counted. By copying, he has displayed great boldness to the
extent that he did not even ascribe it to the original speaker.” This
respectable one did not only accuse Imām Muslim v of this. Rather, the
same accusation was made against other great muḥaddithīn such as
Abū Ḥātim Rāzī v and Abā Zurʿah Rāzī v. (See Ṭabaqātush Shāfiʿiyyah Al-
Kubrā by Tāj-ud-Dīn As-Subkī). Whereas, in reality Abū Ḥātim Rāzī v
actually criticised Imām Bukhārī’s v “Tārīkh” and pointed out many
errors.
It is ironic that people have also hurled this accusation against Imām
Bukhārī v. [They claim that] when ʿAlī ibn Madīnī v went elsewhere, he
(Bukhārī) bribed his [ʿAlī ibn Madīnī’s] son with money and took ʿAlī
ibn Madīnī’s “Kitābul ʿIlal” and got it copied from the scribes. When ʿAlī
ibn Madīnī v became aware of this, he became very disheartened and it
is in this sorrow that he passed away. After this book, Imām Bukhārī v
had no need for ʿAlī ibn Madīnī v. He went to Khurāsān and compiled
his Ṣaḥīḥ.27
27 When this was narrated regarding Imām Bukhārī v, Ḥāfiẓ v became very
perplexed and he refuted it. This is being faithful (to Imām Bukhārī v).
‫ُصم‬
ِ ‫( ُحبِّك الشيء يُعمِ ي وي‬Your love for something blinds and deafens.) [Extracted from
Ifādātush Shaykh]
180
Regarding this, Ḥāfiẓ Ṣāḥib v has mentioned that this narrative is

absolutely erroneous. He refuted it with details. However, he
mentioned a similar narrative regarding Imām Muslim v without
refuting or criticising it. Rather, he also used it as an evidence.
The correct opinion is that no one took any one’s book nor did they
copy them. All of these aʾimmah were from the same era. Many of their
teachers were the same. Thus, their statements and knowledge were
also similar. Things they knew were similar. Yes, it is true that every
later scholar benefitted from an earlier scholar’s book. Hence, every
earlier scholar has a greater virtue over a later scholar. (Ibn Mājah aur
ʿIlm Ḥadīth pg. 95-97)
The Details of The Superiority of Bukhārī Over Muslim
Previously Ḥāfiẓ Ṣāḥib v briefly mentioned the virtues and superiority

of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī. Thereafter, Ḥāfiẓ Ṣāḥib v discussed the virtues of
Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī in detail. He stated: “If one wishes to know the details of
Bukhārī being the most authentic, then he should first understand that
Bukhārī is more authentic than Muslim for six reasons:
1. There are less mutakallam fīhi narrators in Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī than

Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim. The narrators of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī are over four
hundred and thirty (430). There is criticism regarding only eighty
(80) of them, There is a total of six hundred and twenty (620)
narrators in Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim. There is criticism regarding one
hundred and twenty (120) of them. That is, there is criticism
regarding eighteen percent (18%) of the narrators of Ṣaḥīḥ
Bukhārī and twenty-six percent (26%) of those in Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim.
(The narrators of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī are four hundred and thirty-five
(435).) (Nukat pg. 286 and Fatḥul Mughīth by Sakhāwī 1/29)
2. The narrations of the mutakallam fīhi narrators in Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī
are very few. ʿIkramah narrating from Ibn ʿAbbāsh, is the only
mutakallam fīhi chain which comes often in Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī. On the
other hand, Imām Muslim v mentions the narrations of many of the
mutakallam fīhi narrators often. For example: Abū Zubayr Makkī
181
narrating from Jābir, Suhayl narrating from his father, ʿAlāʿ ibn
ʿAbdur Raḥmān narrating from his father, Ḥammād ibn Salamah
narrating from Thābit among other chains.
3. Most of the narrations of those specific mutakallam fīhi narrators
which Imām Bukhārī v collects, are from among his teachers whom
he met and sat with. He studied and observed their conditions and
aḥādīth. On the other hand, many of the specific mutakallam fīhi
narrators of Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim are from the earlier times. It is obvious
that a muḥaddith knows the aḥādīth of his teachers better than the
aḥādīth of the mutaqqadimīn.
4. Imām Bukhārī v is very selective with regards to the narrations
narrated by the narrators of the ṭabqah thāniyah (second category)
he collects whereas Imām Muslim v collects them in the primary
section of his book (his ʿuṣūl) in great numbers across the board
(with istīʿāb) as mentioned in Ḥāẓimī’s v statement previously.
These reasons were with regards to itqān.
5. According to Imām Bukhārī v, it is necessary (for the narrators) in
a muʿanʿan (‫ )معنعن‬chain to have at least met once for it to be
considered muttaṣil.28 He has strictly adhered to this in his Ṣaḥīḥ.
Whereas, according to Imām Muslim v, simply being from the same
era is sufficient once the narrator is not a mudallis. Even if we
accept that the opinion of Imām Muslim v is correct, the method
Imām Bukhārī v chose is more apparent in showing its ittiṣāl.29
6. The total number of narrations which are criticised ( muntaqad
ʿalayh) in Ṣaḥīḥayn is two hundred and ten (210). Seventy-eight
(78) are in Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī only and one hundred (100) are in Ṣaḥīḥ
Muslim only. The remainder thirty-two (32) are found in both. It is
clear that the one who has been criticized less is superior to the
one who has been criticized more. (Hadyus Sārī pg. 12)
Here, the words of Ḥāfiẓ v are ambiguous. He has written:

‫ اختص منها بأقل من ثمانين وباقى ذالك يختص بمسلم‬. (“Less than eighty (80) is from
28 Additionally, they must also have at least heard from each other once.
29 Meaning, Bukhārī’s v conditions are strict. Hence, Bukhārī is more ṣaḥīḥ.
182
it only and the remainder of that is in Muslim only.”) However, from

the remainder, thirty-two (32) narrations are present in both Ṣaḥīḥ
Bukhārī and Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim, as Ḥāfiẓ v mentioned after the detailed
answer on page 383. The summary is that there is criticism on one
hundred and ten (110) aḥādīth of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī.30
This discussion has been explained by a poet in one of his poems:
‫ل ُمسلم‬ ‫وقاف‬ ‫ى‬

ِّ ِ ‫ل ُجعف‬ ‫فَدَعد‬
َّ ‫وبل لهما فَاحفَظ ُوقيتَ عن‬
‫الردِى‬
٧٨
١٠٠
٣٢
78 for Jʿufī and 100 for Muslim.

32 for them both, so remember
and you will be protected from error.
(Mā Yanfaʿun Nās pg. 50 and Muqaddamah Kawkab pg. 24)
30Ṣanʿānī v disapproved of this statement of Ḥāfiẓ v and said: Narrators are of

three types:
1) Those who are in both (Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī and Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim). There are many
of these. No virtue of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī can be established from this.
2) Those who are only in Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī. The virtue of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī can be
established by this because these narrators are of a higher calibre than the
narrators of the third type which are those found in Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim. This is
because the conditions of Imām Bukhārī v are found in them. Additionally, the
narrators of this second type should not be mutakallam fīhi. (Ḥāshiyah Nukat pg.
289)
183
184
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS DISCUSSION OF MUʿANʿAN NARRATIONS
The Condition of Ittiṣāl in Muʿanʿan Narrations 1
When will the muʿanʿan narrations of a ghayr mudallis narrator be

accepted and when will it not be accepted? There is a difference of
opinion in this matter. If the narrator (rāwī) and the one narrated from
(marwī ʿanhu) are not from the same era and the narration is narrated
with ‫عن عن‬, this is termed as ‘irsāl-e-jalī’ (‫)ارسال جلي‬. Due to the break in
the chain (inqiṭāʿ), such a narration will not be accepted except in the
case where a Tābiʿī mentions the Messenger of Allāh n’s name for a
statement or action. That is, there is a well-known difference of opinion
regarding the acceptance of such a Ḥadīth in which a Ṣaḥābī is omitted
from the chain. According to the Aḥnāf and Mālikiyyah, it is accepted.
According to Imām Shāfiʿī v and Imām Aḥmad v, it is accepted with
some conditions. It is not accepted in all cases.
If it is established that both were from the same era, but meeting each
other is not established, according to Imām Bukhārī v, ʿAlī ibn Madīnī
v, Abū Bakr Ṣayrafī v and the muḥaqqiqīn, such a Ḥadīth will not be
classified as muttaṣil. Nawawī v says that this is the most correct view.
(Muqaddamah of Sharḥ Nawawī pg. 77)
According to Imām Muslim v, such a sanad will be considered muttaṣil.

Imām Muslim v has mentioned this as the madh-hab of the
mutaqaddimīn and the mutakh-khirīn and has labelled the ones
adopting the first opinion as “‫”منتحلي الحديث‬, i.e., those who claim to be
muḥaddithīn. It is apparent from this that he is referring to Imām
Bukhārī v and he refuted this view in a very harsh tone. He writes that
1 This discussion is also mentioned in “Sharḥ Nukhbah” and in the

introduction of Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim. However, we have also mentioned some of the
research of ʿAllāmah Shabbīr Aḥmad ʿUthmānī v which is rare and cannot be
found in “Sharḥ Nukhbah”. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
185
this is the opinion of the innovators and no one else is of this opinion. 2
(Muqaddamah Muslim of Nawawī pg. 21-22)
However, the later scholars followed Imām Bukhārī’s v opinion. Imām

Nawawī’s v verdict has been mentioned previously: “‫( ”وهو اَلصح‬and
that is the most correct). Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar v has mentioned the following
in “Sharḥ Nukhbah”:
“Imām Bukhārī’s v narrations are preferred with regards to ittiṣāl

because according to him, to establish ittiṣāl, it is necessary for the
rāwī and marwī ʿanhu to have met at least once. On the other hand,
Imām Muslim v considered muʿāṣarah (‫( )المعاصرة‬being from the same
era) sufficient to establish ittiṣāl. Additionally, he (Imām Muslim v)
made it binding on Imām Bukhārī v not to accept muʿanʿan narrations
at all (due to the possibility that the narrator did not hear directly).
However, this does not become binding on Imām Bukhārī v because
once one meeting3 has been established, the doubt of him not having
heard would necessitate that the narrator is graded as a mudallis,
whereas this discussion (i.e., this difference of opinion) is regarding
the scenario in which the narrator is not a mudallis.” (Sharḥ Nukhbah pg.
30)
To understand this, it is necessary to understand the difference

between irsāl and tadlīs. One type of irsāl which has been mentioned
above is irsāl jalī in which both (the rāwī and the marwī ʿanhu) are not
from the same era (i.e., no muʿāṣarah ‫)المعاصرة‬.
2 ‫منتحلي الحديث‬: There are some people who claim to have become muḥaddith.
There is difference of opinion as to who this is referring to. Many people say
that it is referring to Imām Bukhārī v and many say ʿAlī ibn Madīnī v. Imām
Muslim v has written that this is the statement of the innovator and no one
else is of this opinion, whereas this is the opinion of many great illustrious
aʾimmah such as ʿAlī ibn Madīnī v who is his teacher and Imām Bukhārī v who
is also his teacher. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
3 Meeting means having heard (the Ḥadīth from him) and not simply meeting.
(As-Sunan Al-Abyan by Ibn Rushayd Al-Fihrī- Footnotes of pages 29, 54) Fazl
186
The second type of irsāl is irsāl khafī. There is a very subtle difference
between this and tadlīs. irsāl khafī is when muʿāṣarah between the
rāwī and the marwī ʿanhu has been established. However, liqāʾ (‫)لقاء‬
(meeting each other) is not established.
Tadlīs: Although both muʿāṣarah and liqāʿ are established, a narration

which has not been heard directly is narrated with such a ṣegah
(inflection) in which there are both possibilities; hearing directly or
indirectly. For example: using the word ‫ عن‬ʿan etc. (Sharḥ Nukhbah Karāchī
print pg. 54)
Therefore, if the narrator is known to be a mudallis, there is a

consensus that his muʿanʿan narrations are rejected as long as samāʿ
(‫( )سماع‬hearing directly) is not explicitly mentioned. However, if the
narrator is not a mudallis, then according to Imām Bukhārī v, it is
necessary for them to have met at least once. Otherwise, his narrations
will be considered munqaṭiʿ. According to Imām Muslim v, muʿāṣarah
is sufficient to establish ittiṣāl. Imām Bukhārī v said: “If there is no
liqāʿ, there is the possibility that he is doing irsāl, i.e., he is narrating
without having heard directly.” Yes, if he was to do so after having met,
it would be called tadlīs, not irsāl because in tadlīs both muʿāṣarah and
liqāʿ are established. If there was no liqāʿ [and he narrates without
hearing], then this is known as irsāl. As we have already mentioned
previously, our discussion is regarding the narrator who is not a
mudallis. Therefore, he is not included in this discussion. This is a
summary of Imām Bukhārī’s v explanation.
Imām Muslim’s v Objection
Imām Muslim v made the following objection. Having met and heard
once does not necessitate that each and every Ḥadīth which was
narrated with a ṣegah muḥtamalah (probable inflection) was heard
directly. It is possible the narrator narrates some Ḥadīth using the
word ‫ عن‬etc. without actually having heard (directly). Therefore,
whenever a narration is narrated with ‫عن‬, the possibility of not having
187
heard directly remains. It is for this reason, Imām Bukhārī v should not
have accepted any muʿanʿan narrations.
More Details Regarding This Discussion
Imām Muslim’s v objection seems valid due to the following reason.

When liqāʾ is not proven, it is possible that there is no samāʿ (‫)سماع‬.
Similarly, this possibility (i.e., no samāʿ) is also present when liqāʾ has
been established once. This possibility (i.e., no simāʿ) remains in both
scenarios whether one calls the first scenario irsāl and the second one
tadlīs. The reason for this is that this narrator has not been proven to
be a mudallis from any external factor. Therefore, he will be considered
a ghayr mudallis. Now, if the discussion was to arise regarding whether
a specific Ḥadīth is muttaṣil or not, then in such an instance this
narration cannot be classified as the ‫ عنعنة‬of a mudallis since there is no
proof that the narrator is a mudallis. Rather, the accepted view is that it
is the ‫ عنعنة‬of a ghayr mudallis. This is a matter to ponder over.
Mawlānā Shabīr Aḥmad ʿUthmānī v commented that when muʿāṣarah

is established, but liqāʾ and samāʿ is not established, then from one
angle it can be called called tadlīs since muʿāṣarah is established and
from the other angle, it can be called irsāl as samāʿ has not been
established. However, it cannot be called irsāl jalī as muʿāṣarah has
been established. Neither can it be tadlīs as samāʿ and liqāʾ have not
been established. Even then some people have called it tadlīs while
others have also called it irsāl. Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar v has named it irsāl
khafī. However, I am saying that it should be partially graded as tadlīs
and partially graded as irsāl. If only muʿāṣarah has been proven and
there is no evidence for samāʿ and liqāʾ, rather, it is proven that there
was neither of the two, then this is classified as mursal, because there
is no deception in this case. If muʿāṣarah is proven and samāʿ is neither
established nor negated, then this situation is unknown. It should be
considered tadlīs as this is the difference between irsāl and tadlīs. It is
188
tadlīs when deception is evident and when it is proven that there was
no samāʿ, it is irsāl. This has been mentioned by Sakhāwī v and others.4
Now understand that Imām Muslim’s v objection is valid because

Imām Bukhārī v says that there is the possibility of irsāl when there is
no liqāʿ and after liqāʾ, there remains the possibility of tadlīs and not
irsāl. In reply to this, Imām Muslim v will say: “It will be tadlīs when
liqāʾ is established and also when it is not established regardless of
whether one calls it irsāl khafī or something else. This is because in all
instances, there is ambiguity in ‫ عنعنة‬narrations and in irsāl there is no
ambiguity. ‫( والمسئلة مفروضة في غير المدلس‬And the topic of
discussion is regarding the ghayr mudallis.)
Additionally, our discussion is regarding the ghayr mudallis. (So just

like it is accepted after liqāʾ, it should also be accepted before liqāʾ
because of the reliability of the narrator and adhering to ḥusn ẓan
(good thoughts) regarding him.)
With regards to Mukhaḍramīn’s5 narration, it is correct that it is

mursal and not mudallis because it is established that they did not
meet Nabī n. When it is established that the narrators did not meet and
hear from each other, the matter becomes clear and there remains no
ambiguity. Therefore, it should be called mursal and not mudallis.
(Darse Bukhārī of ʿAllāmah Shabbīr Aḥmad ʿUthmānī pg. 15-16, published by Dabhel)
Now the question remains: is liqāʾ a condition according to Imām

Bukhārī v for the ‫ عنعنة‬aḥādīth of a ghayr mudallis to be classified as
ṣaḥīḥ in general or is it only a condition for it to be included in Ṣaḥīḥ
4This is not mentioned in “Sharḥ Nukhbah”. Sakhāwī’s v book is: “Fatḥul

Mughīth bisharḥi ʾAlfiyyatul Ḥadīth”. “‫”وهو من احسن كتب اصول الحديث‬:.‫قاله الكشميرى‬
Kashmīrī v said: “This is one of the best Uṣūl Ḥadīth books.” [Extracted from Ifādātush
Shaykh]
5 Ḥāfiẓ v objected to the narration of the Mukhaḍramīn. See the answer to it.
189
Bukhārī?6 Some scholars say it is the former while others say it is the
latter. Ḥazrat Shaykhul Hind v said that this is a condition for (it to be
included in) Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī and not for the Ḥadīth itself to be graded as
ṣaḥīḥ. (Darse Bukhārī by ʿAllāmah Shabīr Aḥmad ʿUthmānī pg. 15-16, published by
Dabhel)
Ḥāfiẓ v said that it is for the actual Ḥadīth to be graded as ṣaḥīḥ. In his
“Tārịkh”, he has graded many aḥādīth as weak due to this hidden
defect. (Nukat ʿalā Ibniṣ Ṣalāḥ 2/595)
This statement of Ḥāfiẓ v is contradictory. Therefore, one should refer

to ʿAbdul Fattāḥ Abū Ghudah’s marginalia on “‫ ”الموقظہ‬by Dhahabī pg.
136.
6 Meaning, is this for general authenticity or is this simply a stringent

condition specific to Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī? If this was accepted as a condition for the
general authentication of aḥādīth, then many aḥādīth of Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim will be
considered weak because they were collected by Imām Muslim based on the
establishment of muʿāṣarah and liqāʾ was not established. Whereas there is a
consensus of the Ummah that just as Bukhārī is ṣaḥīḥ, Muslim is also ṣaḥīḥ.
Yes, it is accepted that Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī is more authentic, however, Ṣaḥīḥ
Muslim is also authentic. Therefore, it must be accepted that meeting is not a
condition for the authenticity of a Ḥadīth, rather liqāʾ is a condition for it to be
included in Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
190
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS MUWAṬṬĀʾ MĀLIK & BUKHĀRĪ
Muwaṭṭāʾ Imām Mālik and Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī
The following is a famous statement of Imām Shāfiʿī v:
“. ٍ‫األرض كتابا ً في العلم أكثر صوابا َ من كتاب مالك‬

ِ ‫”ما أعلَ ُم فى‬
“I do not know of any book of knowledge on this earth more correct

than the book of Mālik.”
Some people narrate: “ ٍ‫”أصح من كتاب مالك‬- “…more authentic that the
book of Mālik.” From this statement, the authenticity of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī
has been degraded. The answer to this is that at that time, Ṣaḥīḥ
Bukhārī and Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim were not present. If these books were
present, then perhaps, Imām Shāfiʿī v would not have made such a
statement. Therefore, the meaning of this statement is: Muwaṭṭāʾ Mālik
was the most ṣaḥīḥ of all the books which were present at that time.
This is the summary of Ibn Ṣalāḥ’s v answer. This [answer] maintains
that Ṣaḥīḥayn is the most authentic.
Ḥāfiẓ v said: “Some of the aʾimmah found it difficult to accept that

Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī is considered more authentic than Muwaṭṭāʾ because
authenticity has been made a condition in both these books and
extraordinary importance has been given to investigating and
verifying.”
However, the answer is that Imām Bukhārī’s v condition of

authenticity is strict. He considers inqiṭāʿ to be a deficiency in the
authenticity. Imām Mālik v does not consider inqiṭāʿ in the chain to be
a deficiency. It is for this reason, the marāsīl, munqaṭiʿāt and balāghāt
are mentioned in the main subject matter of this book. Imām Bukhārī v
does not do this. The muʿallaqāt, etc. are mentioned in the tarājim,
which is not part of the main subject matter of the book. (Hadyus Sārī pg.
10)
191
The tarājim also have an important purpose. How can it be right to

exclude them from the subject matter? The objective of Imām Bukhārī
v was also to derive masāʾil as mentioned previously.
Mawlānā Nuʿmānī’s v Analysis on Ḥāfiẓ’s v Research
Mawlānā Muḥammad ʿAbdul Rashīd Nuʿmānī v has commented on this

research of Ḥāfẓ v in “Ibn Mājah aur ʿIlm Ḥadīth”. He stated: “If this
statement of Ḥāfiẓ v is only based on the apparent differences of the
two books, it is certainly correct. Otherwise, in reality, all the marāsīl,
balāghāt and munqaṭiʿāt narrations of Muwaṭṭāʾ are muttaṣil and
marfūʿ. This is because Ibn ʿAbdil Bar v has proven that all the
mursalāt, balāghāt and munqaṭiʿāt with the exception of four, are
muttaṣil and ṣaḥīḥ. Ibn Ṣalāḥ v, in a separate book of his, has
established that these four are muttaṣil.” ʿAllāmah Ṣāliḥ Fulānī v said:
“I have a handwritten copy of that compilation.”1 From this, it becomes
clear that there is no difference between Muwaṭṭāʾ and Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī.”
This research of ʿAllāmah Fulānī v has been mentioned by ʿAllāmah
Kattāni v in “Ar-Risālah Mustaṭrifah” on page 6. Mawlānā Nuʿmānī v
has quoted this from this book.
Ṣāliḥ Fulānī v has also written that Ḥāfiẓ’s v statement is debatable. If

he had examined Muwaṭṭāʾ as he had studied Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī, he would
not have made that statement. His statement that Mālik’s balāghāt are
munqaṭiʿ is incorrect because although Yaḥyā’s narration (from Mālik)
is mentioned balāghan or mursalan, other students narrate that same
narration from Imām Mālik v mawṣūlan and musnadan. Similarly,
Ḥāfiẓ’s v claim that mursal narrations are evidence according to Imām
Mālik v and his followers and not according to others is also incorrect.
This is because according to Imām Shāfiʿī v and the muḥaddithīn, it is
also evidence, when it is supported by another chain as Ibn ʿAbdil Barr
1This book has been published with the research of Shaykh ʿAbd-ul Fattāḥ
Abū Ghuddah v. Fazl
192
v, Suyūṭī v and others stated. Similarly, ʿIrāqī’s v claim that some of the
Mālik’s v balāghāt are rejected and not accepted is also incorrect
because all of these have been established through ṣaḥīḥ and mawṣūl
chains. (See Ar-Risālah Mustaṭrifah pg. 6)2
Shāh Walīullāh Muḥaddith Dehlawī v considered Muwaṭṭāʾ to be the

most virtuous and superior of all the aḥādīth books. The evidence for
this has been mentioned in “Muṣaffā”, a commentary of Muwaṭṭāʾ.
Mawlānā ʿAbdur Rashīd Nuʿmānī v mentioned the following as

evidence for giving preference to Muwaṭṭāʾ:
1. A big group of senior Tābiʿīn were present at the time that

Muwaaṭṭāʾ was written. Ṣaḥīḥayn was not privileged with this honour.
2. According to Imām Abū Ḥanīfah v and Imām Mālik v,,,, it was

necessary for the narrator to memorise the narration he was narrating.
According to Shaykhayn ‫رحمهماهللا‬, this was not necessary.
3. According to Imām Mālik v, the narration of a bidʿatī (an innovator),

is not worthy of acceptance even if he is honest and upright. However,
Ṣaḥīḥayn mentions narrations of such innovators who are thiqah
(reliable) and ‫( صادق اللهجة‬true to his word).
(The gist of this is that after deep thought and research, the
authenticity of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī over Muwaṭṭāʾ should be carefully
considered.) (Ibn Mājah aur ʿIlm Ḥadīth pg. 180)
In the afore-mentioned book of research by Mawlānā Nuʿmānī v, it is

mentioned that the first Ḥadīth book which was published in fiqhī
order was the writing of Imām Abū Ḥanīfah v (Kitābul Āthār) which
many of his students narrate from him. A strong evidence and support
2 Ibn ʿAbdil Barr Mālikī v carried out this task by writing “At-Tamhīd” and “Al-
Istidhkār”. Only four aḥādīth were not included. Ibn Ṣalāh v included them.
193
for this claim is mentioned on page 158 onwards. Imām Mālik v

followed this style. Imām Suyūṭī v clarified this. He wrote:
‫علم الشريعة ورتِّبه أبوابا ث ِّم ت ِبعه مالك في‬

َ ‫دون‬ ِّ ‫ب أبى حنيفة التى اِنفرد بها أنه أو ُل َمن‬
ِ ‫” مِ ن مناق‬
َ
“ .‫ترتيب ال ُمؤطأ ولم يَسبِق أبا حنيفة أحد‬
“Amongst Imām Abū Ḥanīfah’s v special virtues is that he was the first to
organise the knowledge of Ḥadīth in chapter format. Imām Mālik v followed
this style in arranging the order of Muwaṭṭāʾ. No one surpassed Imām Abū
Ḥanīfah v in this.”3 (Tabyīḍus Ṣaḥīfah pg. 36)
In both these compilations, the Messenger of Allāh’s n sayings were

listed as mabnī awwal (main text) and the fatāwā of the Ṣaḥābah g and
Tābiʿīn were listed as mabnī thānī. If one looks at it from this angle,
then there is no difference between Muwaṭṭāʾ and Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī. (Ibn
Mājah aur ʿIlm Ḥadīth pg. 169)
From this research, it also becomes clear that the well-known narrative
that Muwaṭṭāʾ was the first book to have been published in fiqhī order
is incorrect. This statement is accurate with regards to Imām Abū
Ḥanīfah’s v “Kitābul Āthār”.4
Note:
Additionally, it should be noted that the following has been narrated

with a muttaṣil chain that Imām Mālik v studied the books of Imām
Abū Ḥanīfah v for research and he would gain tremendous benefit
from them. (Ibn Mājah aur ʿIlm Ḥadīth pg. 161)
3His superiority in the field of fiqh is well known and widely accepted. From
this, his superiority in the field of Ḥadīth is also established. [Extracted from Ifādātush
Shaykh]
4This is so well known to the extent that Mawlānā Sulaymān Nadwī v has also
written this. Mawlānā ʿAbdur Rashīd Nuʿmānī v strongly refuted him. [Extracted
194
Sufyān Thawrī v was also a student of Imām Abū Ḥanīfah v. He used to

attend his classes. However, he acquired the fiqhī knowledge of Imām
Ṣāḥib v from his student, ʿAlī ibn Mus-hir, and through his help and
advice he prepared his Jāmiʿ. Yazīd ibn Hārūn explained this. (See Ibn
Mājah aur ʿIlm Ḥadīth pg. 184 for references and proofs.)
The narration of Imām Abū Ḥanīfah v from Imām Mālik v is not

established. See:‫أقوم المسالك في بحث رواية مالك رح عن أبي حنيفة رح ورواية أبي حنيفة رح عن مالك رح للكوثرى رح‬
195
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS WHY IS THERE REPETITION IN BUKHĀRĪ?
See “Bulūghul Amānīfī Sīratil Imām Muḥammad ibn Ḥasan Shaybānī”

by Muḥaddith Kawtharī, page 10 onwards, for the details regarding
how the student of Imām Muḥammad v, Asad ibn Furāt compiled the
fiqh of Imām Mālik v and the contribution of Imām Abū Ḥanīfah v and
Imām Muḥammad’s v books towards this compilation.
Why Is There Repetition in Bukhārī?
In the introduction, Ḥāfiẓ v quoted Maqdisī v: “Imām Bukhārī v brings

one Ḥadīth multiple times with different chains and in every instance,
through his excellent ability to derive, he would derive the best
meaning according to the chapter. There are very few places where he
would repeat the same Ḥadīth with the same wording and chain.”
Imām Bukhārī v himself said in ‘Bāb-ut-Taʿjīl ilal Mawqaf’ volume 1

page 226:
‫ يزاد في هذالباب 'هم' هذا الحديث حديث مالك عن ابن شهاب ولكنى أريد أن أدخل‬:‫قال أبو عبد هللا‬
‫ اه‬.‫غير ُمعاد‬
It is known from this text of Imām Bukhārī v, that he does not like to
repeat Ḥadīth. Even then, there is repetition of the sanad and matn in
some places. According to Ḥāfiẓ v, there are a total of twenty-one
[repetitions]. Qasṭalānī v added one more which would make it
twenty-two1. Qasṭalānī v mentioned them in the introduction of his
1Ḥazrat Shaykh Muḥammad Zakariyyā v wrote in the footnotes of the

introduction of “Lāmiʿ”: “Mawlānā Yūnus Ṣāḥib, the teacher of Ḥadīth in
Madrasah Maẓāhirul ʿUlūm (death: Shawwāl 1438 A.H v), added one hundred
and twenty-eight [such Ḥadīth] and wrote a treatise on it titled, “Irshād ul
Qāṣid ilā mā Takarrara fil Bukhārī bi Isnādin Wāḥidin” (Muqaddamah Lāmiʿ page
31) (Currently, it is published in the third volume of “Al Yawāqīt-ul-Ghāliyah”.)
It is possible that in these places the sanad is the same but there are slight
differences in the matn. The commentators do not consider this as repetition.
196
commentary. One of Ibn Ḥajar’s v writings which I found mentions

twenty-one Ḥadīth. (Muqaddamah Qasṭalānī pg. 29-30)
Otherwise, in the introduction of “Fatḥul Bārī”, Ḥāfiẓ v only wrote the

following: “ً ‫ وهو قليل جدا‬.‫”واِن كا َن قد وق َع له من ذالك شيء فعن غير قصد‬. “Even
though in a few places there has been repetition of the sanad and matn ,
this is very rare.” (Hadyus Sārī pg. 16) Yes, there are many repetitions
where there is a difference in either the sanad or matn. However, there
is a benefit in this.
Maqdisī v mentions eight reasons for repetition:
1. After mentioning the Ḥadīth of one Ṣaḥābī, he mentions the same

Ḥadīth from another Ṣaḥābī so that there is no gharābah. Similarly,
he does this with the lower categories until their teachers.
2. Imām Bukhārī v has authenticated many Ḥadīth by using the
principle of mutābiʿāt and supporting chains. Each Ḥadīth comprises
of various meanings. It is for this reason they are mentioned in
different chapters with varying chains.
3. Some narrators shorten a Ḥadīth and some narrate the complete
Ḥadīth. Imām Bukhārī v mentions every narrator’s narration as they
have narrated it so that this doubt is removed from the narrator.
4. The texts of the narrators are all different. In one narrator’s
narration, there is a word which has a possible meaning. Another
narrator narrates that same narration using such a word which has
the possibility of another meaning. Thus, Imām Bukhārī v mentioned
its different variations and established a different chapter for each
word.
5. There is a difference with regards to ittiṣāl and irsāl in narrations.
Although ittiṣāl is preferred, he still mentions the narrations of irsāl
to show that this mursal narration does not affect giving preference
to the mawṣūl narration.
6. This is also the case with mawqūf and marfūʿ narrations.
7. In some chains of certain ḥadīth, there are extra narrators. According
to the research of Imām Bukhārī v, both chains of the narration are
197
established (through the Shaykh and also the chain which does not
go through the Shaykh). Both of them are mentioned (to show that
this is from ‘mazīd fī muttaṣil asānīd’ (‫)مزيد في متصل اَلسانيد‬.
Some narrations are narrated as a ‫ معنعن‬narration. However, it is clear

from another chain that he heard directly. Therefore, he also mentions
this chain to show that liqāʾ (meeting of the narrators) is established.
198
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS WHY IS THERE TAQṬĪʿ IN BUKHĀRĪ?
Why is there Taqṭīʿ in Bukhārī?1
Imām Bukhārī v has fragmented and shortened the texts ( mutūn) of

the aḥādīth. Maqdisī v mentioned that the reason for this is as follows:
“If the text is short or it is interconnected and comprises of a few
rulings, Imām Bukhārī v repeats it and mentions a benefit of the
Ḥadīth. For example, he would narrate that same narration from
another teacher. If this is not possible because that Ḥadīth has only one
chain, he alters it slightly. For example, if he mentions it mawṣulan in
one chapter, he mentions it as a muʿallaq narration in another chapter.
Sometimes, if he summarizes it in one chapter, he mentions the
complete Ḥadīth in another chapter. If the text is long and it comprises
of various meanings and they are not inter-connected, rather they each
have a separate meaning, then each sentence is brought under a
separate chapter so that it does not become lengthy. Sometimes, if
there was enthusiasm, he mentioned the entire Ḥadīth.”
1 Imām Bukhārī v has fragmented aḥādīth. He mentions a portion under one

chapter and mentions the other portion under another chapter. This is why it
is difficult to find a Ḥadīth in Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī. It is for this reason people have
marked off and made note of the aṭrāf of Bukhārī. Mawlānā ʿAbdul ʿAzīz
Punjābī Suhalwī v (the author of the marginalia on the first volume of “Naṣbur
Rāyah”) also wrote “Nibrāsus Sārī ʿalā aṭrāfil Bukhārī” In this book, he
mentioned all the different places where the same Ḥadīth is repeated. We also
benefitted from this book by noting the varying places where the Ḥadīth is
mentioned in our Bukhārī. Additionally, the sanad is not mentioned in this
book. We also mention the sanad: was it narrated from Zuhrī or from his
student Mūsā ibn ʿUqbah or was it from Zuhrī’s teacher? These are very
interesting points which our Bukhārī is filled with. Alḥamdulillāh, we have
completed this task by staying awake for numerous nights. [Extracted from Ifādātush
Shaykh]
199
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS TOTAL NUMBER OF AḤĀDĪTH
In summary, he did not intentionally repeat any Ḥadīth which had the
same matn and sanad. If repetition of such a Ḥadīth did occur, it was
unintentional and this has occurred in very few instances.
In some places, he shortens a Ḥadīth and he also does not mention the
remainder of that Ḥadīth in another place. The reason for this is as
follows: the portion which was not mentioned was mawqūf on the
Ṣaḥābī (i.e., it was a statement of the Ṣaḥābī). It could not be
categorized as marfūʿ. For example, the Ḥadīth of Huzayl ibn Shuraḥbīl
from ʿAbdullāh ibn Masʿūdz: ‫سيِّبون واِ َّن أه َل الجاهلي ِة يُسَي ِّبون‬
َ ُ‫ ا َِّن أه َل اإلسالم َل ي‬:‫قال‬
‫الخ‬. (Hadyus Sārī pg. 16)
The Number of Aḥādīth in Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī1
Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar v has discussed regarding the number of aḥādīth in

Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī on page 468 and 477 of the introduction of “Fatḥul Bārī”.
He also discussed this in “Fatḥul Bārī” in volume 1, page 84 and volume
13, page 543. However, he first mentions Ibn Ṣalāḥ’s v and Nawawī’s v
statements and refuted them.2
Ibn Ṣalāḥ’s v and Nawawī’s v Statement
Ibn Ṣalāḥ v has written that the number of aḥādīth in Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī is
seven thousand two hundred and seventy-five (7275) with repetitions
and four thousand (4000) without repetitions.
1We have exerted lots of effort in researching the number of aḥādīth in Ṣaḥīḥ
Bukhārī. We take this opportunity to present to you all the differences we
have found in this regard. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
2This has also been written in the Muqaddamah of Muḥaddith Sahāranpūrī v
which is printed in the beginning of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī. However, this is not
supported by research. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
200
Nawawī v also followed him, and he also mentioned this same number
in “Taqrīb”. (Taqrīb ma-aʿ Tadrībur Rāwī 1/102) Yes, in the sharḥ, (i.e., the
introduction of Sharḥ Bukhārī) the restriction of musnad was added
and it was mentioned that the total number of musnad narrations in
Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī with repetitions is seven thousand two hundred and
seventy-five (7275). Taʿlīqāt and ghayr musnad narrations are
excluded by the restriction of musnad. They were then listed in detail
in the style of an index. (Hadyus Sārī pg. 465, Muqaddamah Nawawī pg. 45)
Ḥāfiẓ v mentioned them and where there were deficiencies, he

rectified them. He expresses his surprise regarding the astonishing
mistakes he found. This is because Nawawī v quoted this from Hamawī
v and Hamawī v quoted this from Abul Faḍl Muḥammad ibn Ṭāhir Al-
Maqdisī’s v book (‫)جواب المتعنت‬. Then, other authors continued to quote
from this. Poets wrote poems so that they can be remembered easily.
However, they did not conduct any research. ‫فيا للعجب‬.
After listing the chapters, Ḥāfiẓ Ṣāḥib v mentioned in the end that the
total number of all the aḥādīth with repetitions is seven thousand three
hundred and ninety-seven (7397) after excluding the muʿallaqāt and
mutābiʿāt.3
After counting the muʿallaqāt and mutābiʿāt, he mentioned the total

number of muʿallaqāt to be one thousand three hundred and forty-one
(1341) and three hundred and forty-one (341) regarding the mutābiʿāt
coupled with the‫اختالف روايات‬. Then, all will be added together in the
following way:
Mawṣūlāt: 7397
3It is clear that there is an error in “Tadrībur Rāwī”. The error is that six
thousand (6000) was mentioned instead of seven thousand (7000).
.‫بالمكررة سوى المعلقات والمتابعات ستة آَلف وسبعماة وتسعين‬
ِّ ‫فبلغت‬
“All the aḥādīth with repetitions reach six thousand seven hundred and ninety
(6790) excluding the mutābiʿāt and muʿallaqāt.” (Tadrībur Rāwī 1/103) Fazl
201
Muʿallaqāt: 1341
Mutābiʿāt and the others: 341
Total: Nine thousand and seventy-nine (9079)
However, in conclusion, Ḥāfiẓ v wrote that all the Ḥadīth including the
repetitions are (ً ‫ )تسعة آَلف واثنان وثمانون حديثا‬nine thousand and eighty-two
(9082) in total. (Hadyus Sārī pg. 69)
It is not known how three more were added. In “Muqaddamah Lāmiʿ”,

Shaykh Muḥammad Zakariyyā v mentioned that this is questionable.
(Muqaddamah Lāmiʿ pg. 37, 126)
In the introduction of “Irhsād-us-Sārī”, Qasṭalānī v mentioned that the

total number of the mutābiʿāt coupled with the ‫ اختالف روايات‬is three
hundred and forty-four (344).4
.ً ‫وجملة ما فيه من المتابعات والتنبيه على اختالف روايات ثلثمائة وأربعة وأربعون حديثا‬ 5
(Muqaddamah Qasṭalānī pg. 33)
If it is counted in this manner, the calculations would be correct, and

the total number would be established to be nine thousand and eighty-
two (9082). This is correct. Accordingly, in the end of “Fatḥul Bārī”,
which was written approximately thirty years later, Ḥāfiẓ v mentioned
this same figure. He wrote: “All the narrations in Jāmiʿ Bukhārī- the
mawṣulāt, muʿallaqāt and mutābiʿāt along with repetitions, total to
nine thousand and eighty-two (9082). All the mawṣūl and muʿallaq
narrations excluding the repetitions are two thousand five hundred
and thirteen (2513) in total. From among them, there are one hundred
4 The total of three hundred and forty- one (341) mutābiʿāt mentioned above
is an error. Instead of three hundred and forty-one (341), it should be three
hundred and forty-four (344). Hence, three will be added. The total of nine
thousand and eighty-two (9082) will now be correct. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
5 Three hundred and eighty-four (384) ‫ ثلثمائة وأربعة وثمانون‬is printed in
“Tadrībur Rāwī” 1/103. It is clear that this is an error. Fazl
202
and sixty (160) muʿallaq and mutābiʿāt narrations. The remainder (i.e.,
2353) are mawṣūl.” (Fatḥul Bārī 13/543)
The total number (9082) which has been mentioned is with regards to
the marfūʿ narrations. The mawqūf and maqṭūʿ narrations are not
included in this total. Ḥāfiẓ v said: “This total excludes the mawqūf
narrations of the Ṣaḥābah g and the maqṭūʿ narrations of the Tābiʿīn
and others. I have listed the mawṣūl variations of all these narrations
in my book, “Taʿlīq-ut-Taʿlīq” I have mentioned this total after
conducting thorough research6 which Allāh l opened for me. I do not
know of anyone before me who have explained it as I have done, but I
am still not free of making mistakes and errors. ‫( وهللا المستعان‬And Allāh is
the One sought for help).” (Hadyus Sārī pg. 469)
A Difference of Opinion7
In “Hadyus Sārī”, Ḥāfiẓ v wrote that according to the research, all the
mawṣūl narrations in Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī are two thousand six hundred and
two (2602)8 excluding the repeated narrations.
The muʿallaq marfūʿ narrations which are not mentioned mawṣūlan

anywhere in Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī are one hundred and fifty-nine (159).
In total, there are two thousand seven hundred and sixty-one (2761).
There is a big difference in this total and the total mentioned by Ibn
Ṣalāḥ v. (Hadyus Sārī pg. 477)
6 This book has been published with additional research. The muḥaqqiq titled
it “Taghlīqut Taʿlīq” (with a ‫)غ‬. Fazl
7 Afterresearching, we noticed this difference of opinion which I am
mentioning. Perhaps, one of you who does lots of muṭālaʿah can solve this
problem and clarify this for us. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
8In some copies 2464 is mentioned here [instead of 2602] and the total
mentioned is 2623. This calculation is also correct. 159+2464= 2623. Fazl
203
Ibn Ṣalāḥ v mentioned that the total is four thousand excluding the
repeated narrations. In the first volume of “Fatḥul Bārī”, it is stated:
“According to the research, the number of Ḥadīth in Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī is
two thousand five hundred and thirteen (2513) as I have mentioned
with details in the introduction.” (Fatḥul Bārī 1/84)
However, in the introduction the number two thousand five hundred

and thirteen (2513) is not mentioned. (To my knowledge.) (‫)فيما أعلم‬
If the following question arises: How many marfūʿ aḥādīth are there in
Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī excluding the repetitions? According to the text
mentioned in “Hadyus Sārī” on page 477, the following answer can be
given: the total of all the marfūʿ, mawṣūl and muʿallaq narrations is two
thousand seven hundred and sixty-one (2761). According to that
which is mentioned in “Fatḥul Bārī” volume one, page 84 the answer
will be two thousand five hundred and thirteen (2513). This number is
also mentioned in “Fatḥul Bārī” 13/543.
Another Difference of Opinion
There is also a difference of opinion with regards to the answer to the

following question: How many mawṣūl narrations are there in Ṣaḥīḥ
Bukhārī excluding the repeated narrations?
From the muqaddamah, the answer will be two thousand six hundred
and two (2602).9 (Hadyus Sārī pg. 477)
9 This is as it is mentioned in “Fatḥul Mughīth” by Sakhāwī v [1/34]. Shaykhul

Islām Zakariyyā v has also quoted this in “‫”شرح ألفية العراقي‬. (Ḥāshiyah Tadrīb 1/103)
204
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS KUTUB & ABWĀB
From “Fatḥul Bārī”, the answer will be two thousand three hundred
and fifty-three (2353). (Fatḥul Bārī 13/543)
Another Difference of Opinion
There is also a difference of opinion with regards to the answer to

following question: how many muʿallaq marfūʿ narrations are there
excluding the repeated narrations?
If the answer is given from page 477 of the muqaddamah, the answer
will be one hundred and fifty-nine (159) and if it is given from page
469, the answer will be one hundred and sixty (160). If the answer is
given from “Fatḥul Bārī” 13/543 the answer will also be one hundred
and sixty (160). And Allāh l knows best.
The total number of narrations which are mawqūf on the Ṣaḥābah g or

those who came after them, is one thousand six hundred and eight
(1608). (Fatḥul Bārī 13/543)
Kutub And Abwāb (Books and Chapters)
In Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī, the total number of kitāb (book) titles are more than
one hundred and the total number of abwāb (chapter) titles are three
thousand four hundred and fifty (3450) with slight differences.
All the marfūʿ muttaṣil, ghayr muttaṣil, mawqūf and maqṭūʿ aḥādīth of
Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī including the repeated narrations are 9082 + 1608 =
10690. All the marfūʿ, mawqūf and maqṭūʿ aḥādīth excluding the
repeated narrations are1:
1 If the maqṭūʿ narrations are included, Ibn Ṣalāḥ’s v statement will be

stronger. However, he has restricted it to the marfūʿ muttaṣil narrations as
mentioned in “Ḥājatul Qārī”. Thus, the contradiction remains. There is also a
contradiction in Ḥāfiẓ’s v statements. His second statement is that the total is
four thousand three hundred and sixty-nine (4369). Ḥāfiẓ v mentions that
205
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS KUTUB & ABWĀB
Four thousand one hundred and twenty-one. [2513+1608= 4121]

Or
Four thousand three hundred and sixty-nine. [2761-1608= 4369]
there are two thousand seven hundred and sixty-one (2761) (instead of
2512) excluding the repeated narrations. If this (2761) is added to one
thousand six hundred and eight (1608), it totals to four thousand three
hundred and sixty-nine (4369). The total being four thousand one hundred
and twenty-one (4121) or four thousand three hundred and sixty-nine (4369)
arises due to this contradiction in Ḥāfiẓ’s v statements. [Extracted from Ifādātush
Shaykh]
206
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS ARE THE AḤĀDĪTH OF SAḤĪḤAYN MUFĪD YAQĪN?
Are the Aḥādīth in Ṣaḥīḥayn Mufīd Yaqīn?

Do the Aḥādīth in Ṣaḥīḥayn Give the Benefit of Definite Knowledge?
There is a difference of opinion among the scholars regarding whether

the aḥādīth of Ṣaḥīḥayn are mufīd yaqīn or not. There are great
muḥaqqiqūn ʿulamāʾ on both sides of the argument. In his introduction
to ʿIlm Ḥadīth, Ibn Ṣalāḥ v (death: 643 A.H) claimed that the
authenticity of Ṣaḥīḥayn’s muttafaq ʿalayhi (‫ )متفق عليه‬aḥādīth are
definite and ʿilm naẓrī 1is acquired from them. However, some people
reject this and say that only (ʿilm ẓannī)2 can be acquired from them.
The ummah accepted this because it is wājib (necessary) to practise on
ẓan3 even though ẓan can be incorrect at times.
Ibn Ṣalāḥ v stated: “Initially, I was also of this opinion. However, later it
became apparent that the first opinion is correct. 4 This is because the
ummah is ‫( معصوم عن الخطأ‬protected from making errors) and the ẓan of
a ‫ معصوم‬does not err. It is for this reason that the ijmāʿ (consensus of
the ummah) which is based on ijtihād is definite. Most of the ijmāʿāt
are like this.5 This is a very beneficial point. The conclusion of this is
that the narrations mentioned only in Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī or Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim
will also be like this.6 Yes, those narrations which have been criticised
by Darquṭnī v are exempted from this.” (Muqaddamah Ibn Ṣalāḥ pg. 14
Published in Pakistan)
1 This refers to opinions arrived at through analogical deductions. [Translator]

2 Predominant belief. [Translator]
3 Nearly conclusive evidence. [Translator]
4Meaning ʿilm yaqinī is acquired even though it is naẓrī. One should ponder
deeply over the statement of Ibn Ṣalāḥ v. We will be refuting it. [Extracted from
Ifādātush Shaykh]
5 The answer for this will be mentioned further. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
6 Meaning, not only the muttafaq ʿalayhi (‫ )متفق عليه‬narrations. Rather, those
narrations which are found in Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī or Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim alone are also
like this. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
207
After mentioning Ibn Ṣalāḥ’s v statement in “Taqrīb” (maʿa Tadrīb 1/133),

Imām Nawawī v (death: 676 A.H) mentioned:
‫ يفيد الظن ما لم يتواتر‬:‫ خالفه المحققون واألكثرون فقالوا‬The muḥaqqiqūn and
majority of the ʿulamāʾ have opposed this. They say: “It gives the
benefit of ẓan as long as it is not mutawātir.” (Nawawī also mentions this in
Muqaddamah Sharḥ Bukhārī pg. 40)
The reason for this is further explained in Sharḥ Muslim that this is the
condition of āḥād (narrations). There is no difference in this between
Ṣaḥīḥayn and other than Ṣaḥīḥayn. The only difference is that there is
no need to ponder over the aḥādīth of Ṣaḥīḥayn in order to practise
upon them while there is a need to ponder over the aḥādīth that are in
other than Ṣaḥīḥayn. With regards to talaqqī bil qabūl ‫( تلقي بالقبول‬the
ummah’s complete acceptance), the obligation of ʿamal (practising on
the Ḥadīth) is established from it. There is also a consensus on the
obligation of ʿamal in such a case. This does not necessitate that it is
definitely Nabī n’s statement. Ibn Burhān and Ibn ʿAbdus Salām also
refuted Ibn Ṣalāḥ’s v statement. In his “Alfiyah”, Ḥāfiẓ Zayn-ud-Dīn v
also considered Nawawī’s v statement to be the opinion of the
muḥaqqiq scholars. Sakhāwī v considered it to be the opinion of
majority of the ʿulamāʾ. (Tadrībur Rāwī 1/132 and Fatḥul Mughīth 1/51)
In support of Ibn Ṣalāḥ v, Bulqīnī v said that the statement of Nawawī

v, Ibn ʿAbdus Salām v and others are not acceptable, because just like
Ibn Ṣalāḥ v, some of the later ḥuffāẓ have narrated an opinion of a
group of Shāfiʿīyah such as:
Abū Isḥāq Asfirāʾīnī, Abū Ḥāmid Asfirāʾīnī, Qāḍī Abū Tīb, Shaykh Abū
Isḥāq Shayrāzī ‫رحمهم هللا‬
From the Ḥanafīyah: Sarakhsī v
From the Mālikiyyah: Qāḍī ʿAbdul Wahhāb v
From the Ḥanābilah: Abū Yaʿlā, Abūl Khaṭṭāb, Ibnus Zaghwānī ‫رحمهم هللا‬
From the Ashāʿirah: Ibn Fawrak v
Most of the Ahl Kalām, all the muḥaddithīn and majority of the salaf
‫رحمهم هللا‬.
208
Ibn Ṭāhir Maqdisī v (death: 507 A.H.) also included those aḥādīth
which are on the condition of Ṣaḥīḥayn.7
Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar v agreed that Nawawī’s v opinion is the opinion of the
majority scholars, however, he did not accept this as the opinion of the
muḥaqqiqīn. Rather, he said that the muḥaqqiqīn (i.e., some of them)
even agreed with Ibn Ṣalāḥ v. (Tadrībur Rāwī 1/132) The conclusion is that
there is also a difference of opinion among the muḥaqqiqīn.
In “Sharḥ Nukhbah”, Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar v discussed this issue in a very

relevant and befitting manner. A summary of this is as follows. In
reality, this difference of opinion is lafdhī (in the wordings). Those who
said ‘mufīd ʿilm’, by using the word ʿilm they meant ʿilm naẓrī, that
which is deduced from proofs. Those who oppose this (i.e., mufīd ʿilm),
meant ʿilm badīhī which is only acquired from mutawātir. ʿIlm ẓannī is
acquired from āḥād (narrations), not ʿilm yaqīnī. However, even these
people agree that those āḥād which are ‫( محتف بالقرائن‬surrounded by
circumstantial evidence) are given preference over those which are not
‫محتف بالقرائن‬. (And with progress it can become ʿilm yaqīnī.)8
One type of ‫ محتف بالقرائن‬which has been mentioned is that when a

ḥadīth is muttafaq ʿalayhi but it has not reached the level of tawātur,
there has been no criticism on it and there is no Ḥadīth of the same
status which has a meaning contradictory to it, then it will be ʿilm
yaqīnī.9
The external factors are:
1. The high status of Shaykhayn in the field of Ḥadīth.
7 Notice how Bulqīnī v supported Ibn Ṣalāḥ v. On both sides there are great
ʿulamāʾ. Such a matter becomes very delicate. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
8Even those who say mufīd ẓan agree that after ‫ محتف بالقرائن‬it gives the benefit
of ʿilm yaqīnī. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
9 Notice that Ibn Ṣalāḥ v did not add these conditions. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
209
2. Their superiority in differentiating between ṣaḥīḥ and ghayr ṣaḥīḥ.

3. The acceptance of their books alone is stronger for ifādat-e-ʿilm
than having many chains.
Objection: If someone makes the objection that there is a consensus

regarding the obligation to practise on the aḥādīth of Ṣaḥīḥayn, but
there is no consensus on it being ʿilm yaqīnī, the following reply will be
given.
Answer: [Ibn Ḥajar v] replies by saying that there is a consensus

regarding the obligation to practise on every Ḥadīth [whether it is in
Ṣaḥīḥayn or ghayr Ṣaḥīḥayn]. Since this is the case, then what remains
regarding the superiority of Ṣaḥīḥayn which is universally accepted?
[Therefore, in order to prove the virtue and superiority of Ṣaḥīḥayn,
along with the consensus of the obligation to practise on every Ḥadīth,
there should also be a consensus that ʿilm qaṭʿī is acquired from the
aḥādīth of Ṣaḥīḥayn.]
However, this answer can be refuted by saying that the superiority of

Ṣaḥīḥayn is established by their aḥādīth being the most authentic. By
accepting this alone, Ṣaḥīḥayn’s superiority is established. (Sharḥ
Nukhbah pg. 21)10
It is not necessary to consider their aḥādīth mufīd ʿilm [to prove their
superiority]. Therefore, that which Ḥāfiẓ Ṣāḥib v wrote regarding
ifādiyat-e-ʿilm is pointless and the objective has not been achieved.
The summary is that Ḥāfiẓ v agreed with Ibn Ṣalāḥ v. Similarly, Ibn
Kathīr v and Suyūtī v (also agree with Ibn Ṣalāḥ v). However, their
evidence is not concrete, as its weakness becomes apparent from the
10 His final statement destroyed all that he said before it. [Extracted from Ifādātush
Shaykh]
210
final statement of Ḥāfiẓ v. Similarly, Ibn Ṣalāḥ’s v evidence is also not

strong.11
The Answer to Ibn Ṣalāḥ’s Evidence
Firstly, it should be understood that a ṣaḥīḥ Ḥadīth is one in which the

conditions of ṣiḥḥat (authenticity) are found. It does not mean that it is
definite in itself. Meaning, a Ḥadīth being authentic does not make it
definite that it is the statement of Nabī n. (See Tadrībur Rāwī pg. 1-75 and
Fatḥul Mughīth by Sakhāwī pg. 1-21)
Now understand that there is a consensus that the aḥādīth in Ṣaḥīḥayn

are all authentic. Therefore, from this consensus, the authenticity of the
aḥādīth in Ṣaḥīḥayn becomes definite (based on the iṣṭilāḥī definition
of ṣaḥīḥ which was previously mentioned). This is because qaṭʿīyat
(certainty) is only established for precisely that thing upon which
there is ijmāʿ (consensus) and it is not established for other things.12
Therefore, this ijmāʿ does not prove the ṣiḥḥat fiqhī (juristic
authenticity of the Ḥadīth), i.e., the certainty of the subject and
meaning [of the Ḥadīth] is not established [by this ijmāʿ].
11When the evidence does not support his opinion, then how can you agree
with it? An opinion which is not supported by evidence should not be
accepted because it is the evidence which inclines a person towards
(accepting) a particular opinion. This is why it is called a proof.
Ibn Ṣalāḥ said: “Initially, I was of the same opinion as Nawawī that it is mufī
ẓan. Later, I retracted and adopted this opinion [that it is mufīd yaqīn].”
However, we are saying that your first opinion was correct. [Extracted from Ifādātush
Shaykh]
12Meaning the aḥādīth of Ṣaḥīḥayn contain all the conditions of authenticity
and this is established with certainty. However, it is not established with
certainty that is it is the statement of Nabī n. There is a difference between the
two. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
211
Even though Imām Suyūtī v supported Ibn Ṣalāḥ v, he did not present
any answer to the contradiction between Ibn Ṣalāḥ’s v opinion and the
above-mentioned opinion of the muḥaddithīn regarding ‫هذا حديث‬
‫صحيح‬. It is for this reason he only mentioned this much:
ُ ‫(فالين‬Tadrīb pg. 1-134)13
‫ لم أر من تَنِّبه له‬،‫ظر في الجمع بينهما فانِّه عسِر‬
In reality, we cannot think of any answer this problem. The only way
this can be solved is if one understands the correct meaning of [the
principle that] ‘There is ijmāʿ on Ṣaḥīḥayn being the most authentic’.
After understanding the correct meaning of [this principle] no
objections will remain. However, even in such a case Ibn Ṣalāḥ v
cannot be supported.
It should also be noted that just as there is a consensus regarding the

authenticity of Ṣaḥīḥayn (or regarding Ṣaḥīḥayn been the most
authentic), similarly, there is a consensus on the authenticity of all such
aḥādīth which contain all the conditions of ṣiḥat even if they are not
found in Ṣaḥīḥayn or are not according to their (Ṣaḥīḥayn’s)
conditions. So, will ʿilm yaqīnī be acquired from all of these ṣaḥīḥ
aḥādīth?14 It is obvious that no one holds this opinion. So, if ʿIlm Yaqīnī
13The meaning of ‫ هذا حديث صحيح‬is as we have mentioned. Ibn Ṣalāḥ’s v opinion
has another meaning. However, there is a consensus on the authenticity of the
Ḥadīth. How can this consensus establish that it is definitely the statement of
Nabī n? Imām Suyūtī v says: “Ponder on the combination of both as this is
problematic. I have not seen anyone addressing this issue.” Suyūṭī v would be
asked: if you could not solve this problem, then why did you agree with Ibn
Ṣalāḥ? After accepting the muḥaddithīn’s definition of ‫ هذا حديث حسن صحيح‬as
correct, one cannot agree with Ibn Ṣalāḥ v. You have to differ with him. Before
Suyūṭī, Ḥāfiẓ v was in this same position. In the end, he demolished the
building he constructed and went away just like that. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
14 Ibn Ṣalāḥ v will be asked: if there is consensus on the authenticity of every
Ḥadīth which is inclusive of all the conditions of authenticity and as you said
ijmāʿ is ‫( معصوم عن الخطأ‬protected from making errors), hence, ilm yaqnī is
established from it, then should ʿilm yaqīnī be acquired from every ṣaḥīḥ
Ḥadīth? Where will Ibn Ṣalāḥ v go? He is trapped. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
212
is not established by a consensus on the authenticity of any ṣaḥīḥ

khabar wāḥid narration nor by the consensus on the compulsion of
practising on it, then how can ʿilm yaqīnī be established by a consensus
that the aḥādīth of Ṣaḥīḥayn are ṣaḥīḥ? This is an issue to ponder over.
The Ḥadīth regarding ‫( جمع بين الصالتين بالمدينة‬combining two ṣalāhs in

one timing in Madīnah) is found in Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim (1/246) (and also in
Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī 1/77,157) with a ṣaḥīḥ chain. Despite this, Imām
Tirmidhī v states that no one practices on it (1/47). Notice that the
Ḥadīth is ṣaḥīḥ according to the iṣṭilāḥī definition (of ṣaḥīḥ) i.e.: the
narrators are reliable, the chain of narration is muttaṣil, and it is not
shādh nor muʿallal. However, this does not mean that the subject
matter is qaṭʿī (definitely correct).15
Similarly, it should also be understood that everyone agrees that if a

case is presented to the judge and two reliable witnesses give
testimony supporting the ‫( مدعي‬person making the claim) then it is
necessary (for the Qaḍī) to pass the verdict in favour of the ‫مدعي‬. There
is a consensus regarding this. However, this does not necessitate that
the judgment of the Qaḍī is qaṭʿī (absolute) and according to the reality
of the matter. Rather, it is possible that the Qaḍī made a mistake; the
15 Even though Imām Tirmidhī v said that no one practices on this Ḥadīth.
However, those who have been criticized for leaving out aḥādīth [i.e, the
Ạhnāf] {‫ }قرعہ فال بد نام من دیوانہ زنند‬say, leave us to practice on this Ḥadīth. No
one else practices on this Ḥadīth, give it to us, we will use it. This is the Ḥadīth
of Ibn ʿAbbās h that Nabī n “‫صلي ثمانيا جميعا من غير خوف وَل مطر وَل سفر‬.” In dire
circumstances, Nabī n did this sometimes. However, this was jamaʿ ṣūrī ( ‫جمع‬
‫)صوري‬. That is, performing Ẓuhr in the ending time [of Ẓuhr] and ʿAṣr in the
beginning [time of ʿAṣr], Maghrib in the ending [time of Maghrib] and ʿIshāʾ in
its beginning time. We are those who take this Ḥadīth and keep it close to our
hearts. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
213
one who he thought was ʿādil (just and upright) was not. Think of this
issue in a similar manner.16
This is the same objection due to which the evidence which Ḥāfiẓ
mentioned in “Sharḥ Nukhbah” was rejected. Also ponder! How can
those aḥādīth, which were khabar āḥād (i.e., they were ẓannī) before
being included in Ṣaḥīḥayn 17 become Mūwjib Yaqīn (that which
necessitates certitude) after they are included in Ṣaḥīḥayn and become
universally accepted (talaqqī bil qabūl)?18 If aḥādīth become mūwjib-e-
yaqīn by being included in Ṣaḥīḥayn, then why are the mutakallam fīh
aḥādīth (those aḥādīth regarding which there is criticism) excluded? 19
Is it that at the time of including these (mutakallam fīh) aḥādīth in
Ṣaḥīḥayn, Shaykhayn’s academic status was weakened? It is clear that
this is not the case. Even if talaqqī bil qabūl is said to be the ʿillah
(reason), it cannot be specific to Ṣaḥīḥayn. Many other aḥādīth from
16 Meaning this ṣaḥīḥ Ḥadīth consists of all the conditions required to

authenticate a Ḥadīth. However, a narrator forgot, made a mistake, got
confused or intentionally lied, even though intentionally lying is far-fetched. It
is human to make a mistake or get confused. ‫اإلنسان مركب من الخطأ والنسيان‬. [Extracted
17 Meaning, before the era of Imạm Bukhārī v and Muslim v. [Extracted from
Ifādātush Shaykh]
18Meaning initially, it was not [mufīd yaqīn] and it later became such. Those
that are mufīd yaqīn were so from the beginning; not that they acquired this
by Imām Bukhārī’s v and Imām Muslim’s v acceptance. [Extracted from Ifādātush
Shaykh]
19 In this case, we would respectfully ask Ibn Ṣalāḥ: why then did you exclude
the aḥādīth which Dārquṭnī v criticised? Dārquṭnī v came a very long time
after Imām Bukhārī v and Muslim v. Imām Bukhārī v and Muslim v wrote
their books and passed on. At that time according to you, they were
considered mufīd ʿilm yaqīnī. So how could Darquṭnī v come and exclude
them from being mufīd ʿilm yaqīnī? It is strange to say that before Shaykhayn
it was mūwjib ẓan and when they came and included it in their books, it
became mūwjib ʿilm yaqīnī. Thereafter, when Darquṭnī v came and criticize it,
it was excluded from being mūwjib ʿilm yaqīnī. This is mockery. This should
not be so. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
214
other than Ṣaḥīḥayn have also achieved the status of being talaqqī bil
qabūl. Then, these should also be considered as mūwjib ʿilm.
Also ponder! Before Dārquṭnī v came, all the aḥādīth of Ṣaḥīḥayn were
mūwjib ʿilm. So, how did Dārquṭnī v have the audacity to criticise
mūwjib ʿilm aḥādīth and invalidate that they are mūwjib ʿilm? It should
also be noted that all of Dārquṭnī’s v criticisms are not valid. Rather,
Ḥāfiẓ v has given satisfactory replies to most of them by which it
becomes known that majority of these aḥādīth are ṣaḥīḥ and
Shaykhayn’s verdict is also correct. Then why are all of them excluded?
Ibn Ṣalāḥ v only excluded the mutakallam fīh narrations. After adding
the restriction: ‫( ما لم يقع التخالف بين مدلوليه‬Sharḥ Nukhbah pg. 20)20 Ḥāfiẓ v also
excluded those aḥādīth from being mufīd ʿilm, in which there are
contradictions within the meaning. It is as though Ibn Ṣalāḥ and others
considered these aḥādīth to be mūwjib ʿilm. Ḥāfiẓ v rejected that they
20Translation: On the condition that there is no contradiction or discrepancy

in the madlūl (purport) of the two aḥādīth.
Meaning, according to Ibn Ṣalāḥ, the aḥādīth in which there is
inconsistency/contradiction in the madlūl are ilm yaqīnī. According to Ḥāfiẓ v,
they are ẓannī. An example of this is the Ḥadīth of Sayyidunā Ibn ʿAbbās h:
When Nabī n entered the Baytullāh on the occasion of Fatḥ Makkah (the
conquest of Makkah) he did not perform ṣalāh. He only sufficed on the
takbīrāt. In Sayyidunā Ibn ʿUmar’s h narration, it is mentioned that he also
prayed ṣalāh. Now, which of the two narrations is ʿilm yaqīnī? If you meet
ʿAllāmah Ibn Ṣalāḥ v, ask him: “Ḥazrat, what type of conviction do you have?
Did Nabī n pray ṣalāh or did he merely make duʿāʿ?” The narrations are
contradictory in Ṣaḥīḥayn. Ibn Ḥajar v has written a commentary and have
written lengthy discussions. It is for this reason, he excluded them. Ibn Ṣalāḥ v
did not write a commentary of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī nor did he write lengthy
discussions like Ibn Ḥajar v. Thus, he did not have this in mind. This is why he
did not exclude them. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
215
be considered mūwjib ʿilm. From this a doubt is created regarding the

ifādat of the remainder.21
This discussion which I am writing is taken from Mawlānā Shabīr

Aḥmad ʿUthmānī’s v discussion in the introduction of “Fatḥul Mulhim”
page 107, and it is very informative.
From this it has been established that the opinion of jamhūr and the
majority of the scholars is correct in this regard. Ibn Taymiyyah v also
supported Ibn Ṣalāḥ v.22 Rather, he was from amongst the first to
support him. He also wrote two articles on this topic as is mentioned
by Jazāʾirī v in “Tawjīhun Naẓr” on page 132.23
Mawlānā ʿUthmānī v writes that Ibn Taymiyyah v and others of a

similar mind-set did not pay attention to this point which I mentioned
in reply to Ibn Ṣalāḥ’s v evidence. Otherwise, they would not have said
such.24 It is also strange that Ibn Ḥajar v and Suyūtī v remained firm on
their opinion although they were unable to reply to the objections.
Manifestation of Truth
After all of this, it should be understood that what Ḥāfiẓ v mentioned in

the beginning of this discussion in “Sharḥ Nukhbah” is correct to a
21Because, as you have heard, in Uṣūl Fiqh when there is a ‫عام مخصوص منه البعض‬
(general from which few have been specified), then it becomes ẓannī, it does
not remain qaṭʿī. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
22 Meaning he agreed that it necessitates ʿilm yaqīnī. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
23These are the ʿulamāʾ of Deoband who hold an esteemed status in the entire
academic world. ‫ ِإذَا َج َم َعتْنَا َيا َج ِريْر الْ َم َجامِع‬، ‫أولئِك آبائي فَ ِجئن ْي بِمث ِل ِهم‬. [Extracted from Ifādātush
Shaykh]
24Ḥazrat Thānwī v also said something similar to this regarding the issue of
tawassul. Ibn Taymiyyah v considers it impermissible, while all of the jamhūr
scholars consider it permissible. Ḥazrat Thānwī v said in one lecture that if
Ibn Taymiyyah v was to hear my speech, perhaps he would have retracted his
opinion. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
216
certain degree. This means that the ikhtilāf is lafẓī. However, that
discussion is not connected to Ṣaḥīḥayn or other than Ṣaḥīḥayn.
Rather, some akhābr āḥād are mūwjib ʿilm for a person who is an
expert in the science of aḥādīth, familiar with all the chains of aḥādīth,
knows the condition of the narrators and is an expert in the ʿilal
(hidden defects) of the aḥādīth. ʿIlm nazrī can be acquired by such a
person after pondering and analyzing. This is not specific to Ṣaḥīḥayn.
Rather, such knowledge can also be obtained from aḥādīth which are
found in other than Ṣaḥīḥayn. Accordingly, Ḥāfiẓ v discussed this
further on in “Sharḥ Nukhbah” and mentioned three types of muḥtaf bil
qarāʾin:
1. The Ḥadīth of Ṣaḥīḥayn

2. Mash-hūr Ḥadīth
3. Ḥadīth Musalsal (‫)باَلئمة الحفاظ ال ُمتقنين‬
He mentions them after saying ‘‫’منها‬, meaning, there are not only these
three types of muḥtaf bil qarāʾin, rather, there are also many other
types.
The summary of this claim (‫ي بالقرائن علي المختار‬ِّ ‫العلم النِّظر‬
َ ُ ‫ )وقد يقَ ُع منها ما يُفيد‬of
Ḥāfiẓ v in “Sharḥ Nukhbah” is that we accept this and agree that the
aḥādīth of Ṣaḥīḥayn are mūwjib ʿilm but not for everyone. It is mūwjib
ʿilm for the giant experts of the chains of narration only. Additionally,
the ʿilm will be naẓrī and istidlālī, i.e., acquired from naẓr (analogical
deductions) and istidlāl. A Ḥadīth being found in Ṣaḥīḥayn is not
sufficient. Rather, they (the experts in Ḥadīth) would research to find
out the number of chains through which this Ḥadīth was narrated and
whether or not the Ṣaḥābah, Tābiʿīn, Tabʿi Tābiʿīn and those who came
after continued narrating this Ḥadīth. Additionally, they would also
research to find out how many of these people [who narrate the
Ḥadīth] were reliable and whether or not it has been continuously
practiced upon. Then, they would only acquire ʿilm naẓrī from it [after
conducting this research]. These conditions can also be found in the
aḥādīth of other than Ṣaḥīḥayn. Perhaps this is the reason why Ibn
217
Ṣalāḥ v did not specify these conditions to the muttafaq ʿalayhi aḥādīth.
Rather, he also applied these conditions to those aḥādīth which are in
Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī or Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim alone. Before him Ibn Ṭāḥir Maqdisī v
(death: 507 A.H) also applied this ruling to those aḥādīth which were
on the conditions of Shaykhayn. (See: Tadrībur Rāwī 1/133)
Ibn Taymiyyah’s Statement
At this point, consider this profound statement of Shaykh-ul-Islām

ʿAllāmah Ibn Taymiyyah v. In “Minhājus Sunnah”, he has written: “In
the authentication of aḥādīth, the Imāms of Ḥadīth did not follow Imām
Bukhārī and Imām Muslim.25 Most of the aḥādīth of Ṣaḥīḥayn were
considered accepted and Ṣaḥīḥ according to the Imāms of Ḥadīth
before the existence of Shaykhayn. They remained ṣaḥīḥ in
Shaykhayn’s lifetime and also after their death. When the Imāms of
Ḥadīth saw their books, they agreed with them regarding the
authentication of the aḥādīth. Only a few aḥādīth, approximately
twenty, have been criticized most of which are found in Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim.
Some have agreed with those who criticized the Ḥadīth and some have
agreed with Shaykhayn. There are more details on this topic.”
(Muqaddamah Fatḥul Mulhim pg. 96)
Meaning the nāqid’s (critic’s) opinion is correct regarding some and

Shaykhayn’s opinion is correct regarding some.
The Statement of ʿAllāmah Anwar Shāh Kashmīrī v
25This is because when a person is a mujtahid in a particular field, he cannot

do taqlīd in that same field. Those who are mujtahids in Ḥadīth cannot do
taqlīd in Ḥadīth. Those who are mujtahids in fiqh, cannot do taqlīd in fiqh.
218
Finally, read this statement of the Khātimatul Muḥaqqiqīn (the last of

the researchers), ʿAllāmah Anwar Shāh Kashmīrī v:
In “Fayḍ-ul-Bārī”, he mentioned: “There are differences of opinion

regarding the ṣaḥīḥ aḥādīth being mufīd qaṭaʿ. Jamhūr do not consider
it mufīd qaṭaʿ. Ḥāfiẓ v is of the opinion that it is mufīd qaṭaʿ.26 Sarakhsī,
Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn Ṣalāḥ ‫ رحمهم هللا‬are also of this opinion. Even
though they are a few, their opinion is the opinion. Furthermore, Ḥāfiẓ
v explained that ifādat-e-qaṭaʿ is naẓrī like the case regarding the
miracle of the Qurʾān. This is not something which is known by all,
rather, only those who have excelled in the science of Arabic are aware
of this. It is for this reason it is said: “‫در اعجا َز القرآن ِّاَل األعرجان‬
ِ َ ‫“– ”لم ي‬Only
two crippled people were aware of the miracle of the Qurʾān.”
(Zamakhsharī and Jurjānī) 27
If you were to make the objection that there are also akhbār āḥād in
Ṣaḥīḥayn, so they will only be mufīd ẓan, [the following reply will be
given].
Answer: Yes, originally it is mufīd ẓan. However, it became mufīd yaqīn

due to being muḥtaf-bil-qarāiʾn and being narrated from many chains.
This is why this can only be achieved by the experts of this field who
can differentiate between what is authentic and what is defective and
those who are aware of the conditions of the narrators and
knowledgeable with regards to jarḥ and taʿdīl. Such people will
research the chains of the Ḥadīth and the condition of the narrators
and then they will acquire this knowledge. From this, it becomes clear
that ifādat-e-qaṭaʿ is not established by the consensus of the ummah
regarding Ṣaḥīḥayn.28 Rather, it comes about after deep thought and
26 Meaning like Imām Nawawī v. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]

27 After this, Shaḥ Ṣāḥib v said – “And I am the third.” (‫)وانا ثالثهما‬. [Extracted from
Ifādātush Shaykh]
28 Ibn Ṣalāḥ v was of the opinion regarding it being mufīd-qaṭaʿ due to the
consensus of the ummah and Ibn Taymiyah v supported him. It becomes
219
research regarding the conditions of the narrators. 29 The real secret

here is that the different types of aḥādīth were categorized 30 keeping
the first three eras in mind. Therefore, consensus and non-consensus is
according to that era. If a khabar wāḥid becomes mash-hūr in the later
times, its popularity is not accepted. Something which was originally
ẓannī cannot become qaṭʿī due to becoming mash-hūr later on. 31
Therefore, the consensus of the ummah regarding the aḥādīth of
Ṣaḥīḥayn cannot make them mufīd qaṭaʿ,32 because originally, they
were āḥād. Yes, it is possible that if one looks at it from the angle of the
status of the isnād and the conditions of the rijāl, it is mufīd qaṭaʿ. An
example of this is the incident regarding the Ṣaḥābahs g turning in
ṣalāḥ [towards the Kʿabah when the change in the direction of the
qiblah was revealed] based on a khabar wāḥid. In this case the khabar
wāḥid is qaṭʿī due to being muḥtaf-bil-qarāiʾn. (Fayḍ-ul-Bārī 1/45)
Notice how Shāh Ṣāḥib v accepted the conclusion. However, he did not
accept the evidence which Ibn Ṣalāḥ v gave nor did he accept the
evidence which Ḥāfiẓ v mentioned first. With regards to the evidence,
this is not specific to Ṣaḥīḥayn. Rather Ḥāfiẓ Ṣāḥib v himself made it
general and included other types as we have mentioned before.
‫فتدبروا وكونوا علي بصيرة‬-So ponder upon this and be amongst those with
insight.
Now, understand the value of Ibn Humām’s statement which is based

on this reality. He said: “To say this (is not correct. Rather, it) is an
enforcement in which taqlīd is not permissible. This is, to say that the
known the Shaḥ Ṣāḥib v does not agree with him with regards to the evidence.
Rather, he only agrees with his conclusion.
29 The proof which Ibn Ṣalāḥ v presents is not ṣaḥīḥ (correct). [Extracted from
Ifādātush Shaykh]
30 ‫ آحاد‬،‫ مشهور‬،‫متواتر‬. Mutawātir, mash-hūr and āhād. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
31The Ḥadīth: ‫ انما األعمال‬became mash-hūr later on. Initially, it was gharīb. It
cannot become mutawātir and mash-hūr. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
32 Notice that this is refuting Ibn Ṣalāḥ v. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
220
aḥādīth of Ṣaḥīḥayn will (always) take precedence over all the aḥādīth
which have been narrated from the narrators of Shaykhayn in other
than Ṣaḥīḥayn. Similarly, they [i.e., the aḥādīth of Ṣaḥīḥayn] will also
take precedence over all those aḥādīth which coincide with the
conditions of Shaykhayn even if the person collecting them is an Imām
……”
The objective of all these discussions (May Allāh protect us) is not to
lower and degrade the rank of Ṣaḥīḥayn. Whoever does this, we
consider him to be an innovator and one that has deviated as is the
madh-hab of our akābīr.33 Rather, our objective is to reaffirm the
importance of the other Ḥadīth books. This is because in these books
there are also many aḥādīth which are like the aḥādīth in Ṣaḥīḥayn and
many are authentic in general upon which there is a consensus of the
ummah that it is necessary to practice upon. Therefore, along with
accepting the authenticity and importance of Ṣaḥīḥayn, it is also
necessary to refrain from any form of extremism. Faith, loyalty and
love for Nabī n and his aḥādīth should be due to the fact that those are
the aḥādīth of the Rasūl n, they are authentic, and have been narrated
with a reliable chain. It should not be due to the fact that they have
been narrated in such and such a book.
،‫ والحمد ہلل علی ما وفّقنا لهذا‬،‫سبيل‬
ّ ‫ق وهو يهدي ال‬
َّ ‫وهللا يقول الح‬
.‫وصلی هللا علی خير خلقه مح ّمد وآله وأصحابه أجمعين‬
And Allāh speaks the truth and He guides toward the straight path.
All praises are due to Allāh that He granted us the ability to do this.
And may Allāh’s blessings and peace be upon the best of creation,
Muḥammad n and his family and all his companions.
33 The superiority of Ṣaḥīḥayn should not be mentioned in such a manner that

it is as though the other Ḥadīth books are thrown in the bin. This is a great
degradation of the aḥādīth. Some people make statements like: “We want the
Ḥadīth of Ṣaḥīḥayn.” What do they mean by this? (Are they saying) do not
present before us aḥādīth from other than the Ṣaḥīḥayn? Are these also not
aḥādīth? The remedy for such people is intended here. [Extracted from Ifādātush
Shaykh]
221
222
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS THE NARRATIONS OF BUKHĀRĪ WHICH HAVE BEEN CRITICISED
The Narrations Of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī Which Have Been Criticized
Dārquṭnī v made objections against one hundred and ten (110)

narrations of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī. Thirty-two (32) of these are also found in
Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim, while seventy-eight (78) are only found in Ṣaḥīḥ
Bukhārī. Ḥāfiẓ v answered these objections in two ways:
1) Concisely.
2) In detail.
Before he answers the objections, he mentioned that these are those

same narrations which Ibn Ṣalāḥ v and others claim did not achieve the
status of talaqqī bil qabūl like the rest of the book. (This is why ʿilm
yaqīnī cannot be acquired from them.)
Ḥāfiẓ v mentioned that this is the best exemption. Thereafter, he said

that there are various statements of Imām Nawawī v regarding these
criticized narrations. It is mentioned in the introduction of the
commentary of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī that the objections of some muḥaddithīn
are based on extremely weak principles. Therefore, one should not be
deceived by them. (Muqaddamah Nawawī Li Sharḥ Bukhārī pg. 68) Ḥāfiẓ v
mentioned that this statement of Nawawī v is incorrect.
In the introduction of the commentary of Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim, Nawawī v

stated: “Some people made objections against some of the aḥādīth in
Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī and Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim in which all of their conditions are not
found.” Dārquṭnī v wrote a book (titled “Kitābul Ilzāmāt wat
Tatabbuʿ”). Abū Masʿūd Dimashqī v also did istidrāk (redressing) of
these. Abū ʿAlī Ghaslān v in the chapter of ʿilal in “At-Taqyīd” also
redressed those parts which are defective and he gave answers for
them or most of them.”
223
Ḥāfiẓ v said: “This point from Nawawī is correct because the answers
for some of the objections are not sufficient.” (Hadyus Sārī pg. 346)
Concise Answer
Ḥāfiẓ v gave a concise answer:
Imām Bukhārī v and Imām Muslim v have a higher rank than the
muḥaddithīn of their era and those after them in knowing whether a
Ḥadīth is ṣaḥīḥ or maʿlūl. It is also agreed upon that ʿAlī ibn Madīnī v
was the greatest scholar of his time with regards to ʿilal Ḥadīth. Imām
Bukhārī v mastered this field of knowledge from him and he said: “I
did not consider myself to be lower than anyone else besides ʿAlī ibn
Madīnī.” Despite this, when this statement of Imām Bukhārī v reached
ʿAlī ibn Madīnī v, he used to say: “Disregard his statement. He has not
seen anyone like himself.”
Imām Muḥammad ibn Yaḥyā Dhuhalī v was the most knowledgeable in

his era regarding the hidden defects of Zuhrī’s Ḥadīth. Shaykhayn ‫رحمهما‬
‫ هللا‬benefitted from him. It is narrated from Imām Bukhārī v that he said:
“I included each Ḥadīth in Bukhārī after having conviction of its

authenticity and performing istikhārah.” Imām Muslim v said: “I
showed Abū Zurʿah Rāzī my ṣaḥīḥ. I took out those aḥādīth in which he
pointed out a hidden defect.”
It becomes clear from these statements that Shaykhayn ‫ رحمهما هللا‬only

included ṣaḥīḥ aḥādīth in their Ṣiḥāḥ. Even if the objections of the
critics are accepted, the most that can be said is that their statements
are contradictory to the research of Shaykhayn ‫رحمهما هللا‬. It is apparent
that when the superiority of Shaykhayn ‫ رحمهما هللا‬in this field is accepted.
Thus, when there is a contradiction, the research of Shaykhayn ‫ رحمهما هللا‬is
given preference. (Hadyus Sārī pg. 46)
Detailed Answer
224
Before giving a detailed answer, Ḥāfiẓ v presented a discourse from

which a summary of the answers can be derived. We mention a
summary of this discourse here. The detailed answer is very lengthy.
The detailed answer can be read in “Hadyus Sārī”.
There are six types of criticized narrations:
1. Those narrations in which there are differences regarding the

addition and subtraction of narrators in the chain. If the chain of the
Ḥadīth in the Ṣaḥīḥ has an additional narrator, it is not correct to
contradict it with a nāqiṣ chain put forth by the critic. This is because
there is inqiṭāʿ in the nāqiṣ chain. How can it be correct to contradict
a ṣaḥīḥ Ḥadīth with a munqaṭiʿ, ḍaʿīf Ḥadīth? Ḥadīth number forty-
five is an example of this.
Even if the narration which comes in Ṣaḥīḥ is from among the mazīd
fī muttaṣil asānīd (‫)مزيد فى متصل اَلسانيد‬, the objection is still incorrect
because it is possible that both aḥādīth are authentic as it is in Ḥadīth
number two and eight.
If the narration that comes in Ṣaḥīḥ has a nāqiṣ chain and an objection
has been made with a chain with additional narrators, it will be seen
whether the additional narrator is a Ṣaḥābī or a reliable non-mudallis
who has definitely met the marwī ʿanhu. Alternatively, if he is a
mudallis, then is samāʿah established in any of the chains clearly? If
that is the case, the objections in all these cases will be invalid.
Otherwise, it is clearly inqiṭāʿ. In this case the answer will be that
according to the author, the authenticity of this Ḥadīth has been
established after a full survey. Its authenticity is either established
through a qarīnah (an external factor-circumstantial evidence) or a
mutābiʿ (supporting chain) was found to support it.1 Ḥadīth twenty-
four is an example of this.
1Similarly, it should be understood that those narrations which the aʾimmah

mujtahidīn used as evidence are worthy of being used as evidence even
225
Some critics criticized those narrations in which the rāwī did not
narrate by hearing it directly from the marwī ʿanhu. Rather, he
narrated based on mukātabah or ijāzah. The answer to this is that
according to the author 2 it is correct to narrate based on ijāzah. This is
why it is not correct to grade it as inqiṭāʿ.
2. Those narrations in which there are differences in the narrations due

to the alterations made by some of the narrators in the chains. In such
a case, if both varying narrations can be reconciled since both of them
are equal in ḥifẓ and ʿadal, it is deduced that this narration was
narrated from the narrator through both of the chains. Ḥadīth
number forty-eight is an example of this.
If it is not possible to reconcile them since those narrating differently
are not on the same level, rather, they are almost on the same level
with regards to ḥifẓ and ʿadal, then the author collects the rājiḥ
(preferred) chain and he either leaves out the marjūḥ chain or
indicates towards it. Ḥadīth number seventeen is an example of this.
For this reason, the ikhtilāf (differences) regarding all these types do
not necessitate iḍtirāb.
though the muta-ʾakh-khirīn have seen some defect in it. Imām Abū Ḥanīfah v
and Imām Mālik v accept the mursal narrations of reliable and upright Tābiʿīn
based on this.
According to the preferred opinion, Imām Aḥmad v also accepts their
narrations. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
2From this answer, it becomes known that it is not correct to make an
objection on those aʾimmah mujtahidīn who grade a Ḥadīth as ṣaḥīḥ based on
their school of thought, whereas, those who came after them did not grade it
ṣaḥīḥ due to differences in the principles. Alternatively, according to the
mujtahidīn authenticity has been established through supporting chains or
qarīnah (external factor) while according to others, it has not been
established. Another reason can be that it reached them with a ṣaḥīḥ chain
while it reached the muta-ʾakh-hirīn with a longer chain in which a
mutakallam fīh narrator is present. In all these cases there will be no objection
upon the aʾimmah mujtahidīn. ‫( فتذكِّر وكُن على ذكر فانه نفيس‬See
Muqaddamah Lāmiʿ page 84) Fazl.
226
3. Those narrations in which some of the narrators made some

additions, however, those narrators who have not mentioned this
addition are more in number or they are more precise (aḍbaṭ). There
will be nothing wrong with this unless the addition is so
contradictory that it is impossible to reconcile them. (If this is the
case, there will be an objection.) If it is not contradictory in such a
manner that this addition is regarded as a completely separate
Ḥadīth, then there is no objection unless it is established by a strong
proof that this addition in the text is from some of the narrators. If it
is of this type, then it will have an effect. See Ḥadīth thirty-four.
4. Those narrations in which there are a few weak narrators, and they
are alone in narrating (this Ḥadīth). There are only two aḥādīth of
this type: number thirty-seven and forty-three. Weak narrators are
also present in the chains of other than these two aḥādīth, however,
they have other mutābiʿ chains to support and strengthen them. This
is why Dārquṭnī v did not mention them. He only mentioned those
two aḥādīth by considering them to be tafarrud (without any
mutābiʿ). However, the correct answer is that in Ḥadīth thirty-seven,
Ubay ibn ʿAbbās ibn Abī Sahl (who is a weak narrator) was supported
and strengthened by his brother ʿAbdul Muhaymin 3 and his
narrations are found in Jāmiʿ Tirmidhī and Sunan Ibn Mājah. In
Ḥadīth forty-three, Ismāʿīl ibn Abī Uways (who is a weak narrator)
was supported and strengthened by Maʿan ibn ʿĪsā and both narrated
this Ḥadīth from Mālik. (Hadyus Sārī pg. 363-389)
5. Those narrations regarding which there is wahm (a doubt). Some
doubts are considered defects while others do not cause it to be
defective.
3However, ʿAbdul Muhaymin is also weak, so it will not strengthen it. In

“Nukat” Ḥāfiẓ v states that Imām Bukhārī v graded it as authentic due to its
combined strength and by also considering the fact that this Ḥadīth is not
discussing jurisprudence. (Nukat pg. 418) Fazl
227
6. Those narrations in which there are differences in the matn due to

alterations in some of the words. Most of these narrations can be
reconciled or one can be given preference.
228
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS THE MUTAKALLAM FĪH NARRATIONS OF BUKHĀRĪ
Dārquṭnī v and others did not discuss the objections regarding the
matn. They only discussed the objections connected to the chains.
Some examples of the differences in the matn which the scholars of
naqd (criticism) did not object to are:
 The narration of Jābir z regarding the story of Jamal.

 Jābir’s z narration regarding fulfilling the debts of his father.
 The narration of Rāfiʿ ibn Khadīj z regarding mukhābarah.
 The story of Dhul Yadayn narrated by Abū Hurayrah z.
 The narration of Sahl ibn Saʿd z regarding the woman who gifts
herself.
 The narration of Anas z regarding the ruling of beginning
recitation with Alḥamdulillāhil Rabbil ʿĀlamīn.
 The story narrated by Ibn ʿAbbās h regarding the woman who
asked regarding her sister’s or mother’s oath.
The explanation of each of these will come in its relevant place.
After investigation and research, alḥamdulillāh it was found that this

difference does not affect the main subject-matter of the book, except
very rarely. (Hadyus Sārī pg. 348) ‫( والنادر كالمعدوم‬And rare is like non-
existent.)
The Mutakallam Fīh Narrators in Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī
Ḥāfiẓ v discussed in detail all those narrators who have been criticised
in alphabetical order. He wrote an article before the discussion from
which the principle to these answers will become known. See “Hadyus
Sārī” for details. The summary of the article is as follows:
Before delving into the details, know that in order for the author of the
Ṣaḥīḥ to collect the narration of any narrator, it is necessary that
according to him, the narrator is upright, has a good retention and does
not make any errors especially since the jamhūr aʾimmah accepted the
Ṣaḥīḥayn as authentic. This is not found in the narrators whose
229
narrations were not collected by Shaykhayn ‫رحمهما هللا‬. In this way,

jamhūr’s consensus regarding the reliability of the narrators of
Ṣaḥīḥayn become established. This is with regards to those narrators
whose narrations Imām Bukhārī v has collected in his uṣūl. Those
narrators whose narrations have been taken in the mutābiʿāt,
shawāhid and taʿlīqāt are on different levels with regards to strength of
retention etc. even though they are all truthful.
If one of the Imāms criticise a narrator of Ṣaḥīḥayn, his criticism cannot

contradict the author of Ṣaḥīḥ’s accreditation of the reliability of that
narrator. Therefore, this jarḥ (criticism) will not be accepted until it
[the jarḥ] is clarified. Such a cause should be mentioned which
necessitates a deficiency in the narrator’s upright nature or precision
or a deficiency regarding the precision of a specific Ḥadīth. This is
because there are various causes of jarḥ. Some cause deficiencies and
some do not.
Shaykh Abul Ḥasan Maqdisī v used to say: “The narrator whose

narrations have been collected in the Ṣaḥīḥ has ‘crossed the bridge’
(‫)جاوز القنطرة‬.” Meaning, his criticism will not be taken into account.
Shaykh Abul Fatḥ Qurayshi v mentioned in his mukhtaṣar: “This is our

belief. We say precisely that which Maqdisī v said except in the case
where there is clear evidence, and it is such a convincing argument
which creates such a strong predominant belief that it overpowers [the
belief] of the consensus on the authenticity of Ṣaḥīḥayn which dictates
that their narrators are all regarded as ʿādil.”
Ḥāfiẓ v said: “The criticism of a narrator is not accepted until it is clear

because there are various causes of jarḥ and they are based on five
factors:
1. Bidʿah (innovations)
2. Mukhālafah
3. Mistakes
230
4. Jahālat-e-Ḥāl
5. When there is a claim that there is inqiṭāʿ (break) in the chain.
For instance, when the narrator is mudallis or mursil.”
[The details of the above are as follows:]
1. No narrator of the Ṣaḥīḥ has been accused of jahālat-e-ḥāl.
2. With regards to mistakes, some narrators make few mistakes and
some make many. If a narrator has been classified as kathīrul
ghalaṭ (one who makes many errors), research should be
conducted to find out if this narration has also been narrated by
such a narrator who has not been accused of such. If it has been
narrated [by a narrator who has not been accused of kathīrul
ghalaṭ], it becomes known that the author relied on the aṣl Ḥadīth
and not on this specific chain of narration. However, if this Ḥadīth
has not been narrated from another reliable narrator, one should
remain silent with regards to grading this Ḥadīth as ṣaḥīḥ
(authentic). However, all praises are due to Allāh l, there are no
such narrations in the Ṣaḥīḥ.
If the narrator has been classified as qillat-e-ghalaṭ (one who
makes few errors); for instance, if statements like the following are
made about him: ‘sayyiʾul ḥifẓ’ (‫)سيءالحفظ‬or ‘lahu awhām’ (‫)له اوهام‬
or ‘lahu manākīr’ (‫)له مناكير‬, the ruling in this case will also be like
the case mentioned above. The narrations of such narrators are
mentioned more often in the mutābiʿāt (supporting chains) in
comparison to the first type of narrators.
3. With regards to mukhālafah through which shudhūdh and nakārat
are created, if a truthful narrator with a strong memory narrates a
Ḥadīth and someone whose memory is stronger than his, or a few
persons whose strength in memory is equal to his narrate it
differently and they cannot be reconciled according to the
principles of the muḥaddithīn, it is called shādh. If there is a big
difference [in the narration] or the narrator is weak in memory, the
Ḥadīth is called munkar. There are very few of these narrations in
the Ṣaḥīḥ.
231
4. With regards to the claim of inqiṭāʾ (break in the chain): Imām

Bukhārī’s v stance is known (that he does not consider being of the
same era to be sufficient. Rather, it is necessary that the rāwī and
marwī ʿanhu met each other at least once). Thus, this objection
cannot be made on (Bukhārī’s) narrators. Despite this, if there is an
accusation of tadlīs or irsāl, then research is done regarding the
muʿanʿan narrations. If it becomes clear that they met and heard
from each other, then the objection no longer remains. Otherwise,
the objection remains.
5. With regards to bidʿah, the narrator maybe involved in either
bidʿat-e-mufassiqah or bidʿat-e-mukaffirah. In bidʿat-e-mukaffirah,
it is necessary that the narrator has been classified as a kāfir by
consensus. For example, there is consensus regarding the disbelief
of the ghālī Rawāfiḍ. Some of them claim the divinity of Sayyidunā
ʿAlī or someone else or that Sayyidunā ʿAlī z will return to the
world before Qiyāmah or they make other similar claims. The
narrations of such ghālī rawāfiḍ are not in the Ṣaḥīḥ at all.
The second type of bidʿah is the one which does not reach the level
of kufr, rather, a person is only classified as a fāsiq (open sinner)
by perpetrating such an innovation (such as the Khawārij and
ghayr ghālī Rawāfiḍ). Also included in this category, are the
innovations which clearly contradict the Ahl Sunnah Wal Jamāʿah,
however, a [weak] interpretation is given to justify them and there
is a leeway for this. When such innovators refrain from speaking
lies and do not do anything contrary to human nature and they are
pious and righteous, there is a difference of opinion regarding the
acceptance of their narrations. Some are of the opinion that all
their narrations will be accepted and some are of the opinion that
all their narrations will be rejected. Some have outlined certain
conditions- the narrator’s narration is rejected if he calls towards
the bidʿah. Otherwise, it is accepted. This third opinion is more
befitting. The aʾimmah have chosen this opinion. Some have added
finer details to this. They say that if the narration of one who does
232
not call towards his bidʿah supports or beautifies the bidʿah, then it
will not be accepted. Others have said: If the narration of the
narrator who calls towards his bidʿah refutes this bidʿah then it is
accepted, otherwise, it is rejected.
Abul Fatḥ Qushayrī v chose another condition. If this narration is
also narrated from a narrator other than this innovator, then no
regard is given to the innovator. If his narration has no support and
it is only narrated by him and the Ḥadīth has no connection to the
bidʿah and the above conditions are present, then his narration is
accepted so that we do not lose this Ḥadīth and Sunnah.
Note
It should also be noted that some people criticized some narrators due
to differences in their beliefs. No consideration is given to this unless
the criticism is proven to be true. Similarly, some righteous people
criticize those narrators who are involved in worldly matters.
However, the reality is that this objection is incorrect if they are
truthful and precise. Additionally, no consideration is given to criticism
which is related to having a connection with or being from the same
era as someone else. Some have also criticized those who are more
reliable and greater scholars of Ḥadīth than themselves. This is also not
considered. (Hadyus Sārī pg. 384-385)
Second Note
In his Ṣaḥīḥ, Imām Bukhārī v mentions the narrations of such narrators

that he himself graded weak in his “Kitābud Ḍuʿafāʿ’’. For example:
Ayyūb ibn ʿĀʾidh, Thābit ibn Muḥammad, Ẓuhayr ibn Muḥammad
Tamīmī, Ziyād ibn Rabīʿ, Saʿīd ibn ʿUbaydullāh Thaqafī, ʿAbbād ibn
Rāshid, Muḥammad ibn Yazīd and Miqsam, the freed slave of Ibn
ʿAbbās h.
It is possible that this is due to difference in ijtihād or that the Ḥadīth

has been established or it has many chains; some higher and some
233
lower and he chose the lower chain. Alternatively, it can be due to

another reason.
234
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS THE TAʿLĪQĀT OF BUKHĀRĪ
(Mā Tamassu Ilayhil Ḥājah pg. 21) For instance, to avoid repetition. (Fatḥul
Mughīth 1/275)
The Taʿlīqāt of Bukhārī
Taʿlīq is a narration in which a narrator in the beginning of the chain is

omitted regardless of if one narrator, more than one or all the
narrators have been omitted. The taʿlīqāt in Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī are
mentioned in two ways:
1. Sometimes, it is mentioned with ‘qāla’ (‫)قال‬or a ṣegah jazam

(‫ )صيغہ جزم‬similar to it.
2. Sometimes, it is mentioned with ‘tudhkuru’(‫ )تذكر‬or a ṣegah
tamrīḍ (‫ )صيغہ تمريض‬similar to it.
Thereafter these taʿalīqāt are also of two types:
1. It is mentioned mawṣūlan in another part of the book. It is
counted in the mawṣūlāt which have been previously
mentioned.
2. It is not mentioned mawṣūlan anywhere in the book.
This second type is being discussed here. There are two types:
1. Those taʿlīqāt that are mentioned with the ṣegah of jazam are ṣaḥīḥ
until the muʿallaq ʿanhu. However, one must ponder upon the
[reliability] of those narrators whom Imām Bukhārī v has
mentioned. It is known from research that some coincide with the
conditions of Imām Bukhārī v. They were not mentioned in the aṣl
(primary subject matter) of the book because most probably, its
substitute was already mentioned. It is for this reason it no longer
remained necessary to mention it with its chain. Alternatively, [its
chain was not mentioned] because he did not hear this Ḥadīth from
his teacher through taḥdīth. Rather, he heard it in a form of a
mudhākirah, or there is doubt regarding samāʿah or he heard it
through someone else. However, in this case Imām Bukhārī v cannot
be accused of tadlīs 1 because Khaṭīb and others have explained that
1 Ibn Mundah v has accused Imām Bukhārī v of this. (Muqaddamaah Anwārul Bārī 2/48)
235
the word ‫ قال‬does not prove samāʿah. Yes, if it was someone’s habit to
mention ‫ قال‬when there is samāʿah [in the scenario when he has
heard directly], and he mentions ‫ قال‬when he has not heard directly,
it will be called tadlīs. However, Imām Bukhārī v is not known for
having a habit of doing this. Thus, this word has the possibility of
both samāʿ and ghayr samāʿ. For this reason, it cannot be called
tadlīs.
Some of the narrations that have been mentioned with the ṣegah jazam
which are not according to Imām Bukhārī’s v conditions are, at times,
according to the conditions of other than Imām Bukhārī v. Sometimes,
they are worthy of being used as a strong evidence. Sometimes, they
are weak. However, they are not weak due to the criticism of the
narrators. Rather, they are weak due to a minor inqiṭāʿ (break in the
chain).
In Kitābut Ṭahārah:
(pg. 44).‫يذكر هللا على كل احيانه‬n‫وقالت عائشة كان النبي‬

This is a Ḥadīth from Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim. The (chain of the) narration in
Sunan is as follows:
‫بهز بن حكيم عن ابيه عن جده‬
Sakhāwī v mentioned that Imām Bukhārī v differed with Imām Dhuhalī v.

This is why when his name comes in narrations, at times, he only states
Muḥammad or sometimes he ascribes him to his grandfather and say
Muḥammad ibn ʿAbdullāh. At times, he ascribes him to his great grandfather
and say Muḥammad ibn Khālid. From this, the listener has this doubt that they
are different shuyūkh but in reality, it is not like this. This action of Imām
Bukhārī v is close to tadlīs but this does not necessitate that the intention of
the narrator remained like this. One should always keep the purest thoughts
regarding the people of piety and taqwā. The reason Imām Bukhārī v did not
mention his name clearly is so that a person does not misunderstand and
think that Imām Bukhārī v agreed with Dhuhalī v in the famous ikhtilāfī
masāʾil (contentious issue) regarding khalq Qurʾān. (Fatḥul Mughīth 1/181)
236
This Ḥadīth is ḥasan. This came in Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī on page 42 taʿlīqan.

In Kitābuz Zakāh:
(pg. 94).‫ ا ئتوني بعرض ثياب من خميص الخ‬:‫وقال طاؤس قال معاذ بن جبل َلهل اليمن‬
This is ḍaʿīf (weak) as Ṭā’us did not hear from Muʿādh. However, the
chain is authentic until Ṭā’us. 2
2. Those taʿlīqāt which are mentioned with ṣegah tamrīḍ. The
authenticity of the taʿlīqāt with this ṣegah is not known until the
muʿallaq ʿanhu. Through research it has been found that some
of them are authentic and some are not. Very few of those that are
authentic are according to Imām Bukhārī’s v conditions. An
objection is raised that why are those that are according to Imām
Bukhārī’s v conditions mentioned with ṣegah tamrīḍ? The reply to
this is that Imām Bukhārī v narrated these as riwāyat bil maʿnā.
Thus, the ṣegah (inflection) was changed. For example, Abū Saʿīd
Khudrī’s z narration regarding ruqyah mentioned in Kitābut Ṭib
(Chapter on Medicine) is as follows:
(2/854)‫ويذكر عن ابي سعيد عن النبي صلي هللا عليه وسلم في الرقي بفاتحة الكتاب‬
This ruqyah was not established by Muḥammad n himself. Rather, Abū
Saʿīd’s z method of recital in the ruqyah is established by the approval
of the Messenger of Allāh n.
Some of those taʿlīqāt which are not according to Imām Bukhārī’s v
conditions are ṣaḥīḥ. Some are ḥasan. Some are ḍaʿīf. However, they
are practised upon. Some are so weak that there is nothing to
strengthen them (i.e., they are not strengthened by being practiced
upon).
An Example of a Ṣaḥīḥ [Taʿlīq]
2 However, Ṭā’ūs met many of Sayyidunā Muʿādh’szstudents. Thus, reliance

can be placed on his statements. It is for this reason that Imām Bukhārī v used
it as evidence. Imām Shāfiʿī v also considered it reliable. He said:
.‫ وهذا مما َل أعلم من أحد فيه خالفا‬،‫ وان لم يلقه لكثرة َمن ل ِقيَه ممن أدرك معاذًا‬z ‫ طاؤس عالم بأمر معاذ‬:‫وقد قال الشافعى‬
(Nīlul Awṭār 4/191. Published in Dār-ul Jīl, Beirut)
237
An example of a ṣaḥīḥ [taʿlīq] is the narration that is mentioned in

Kitābus Ṣalāh (1/106):
‫ المؤمنون فى صلوة الصبح حتى اذا جاء ذكر موسى وهارون‬n‫ي‬

ِّ ‫ويُذكر عن عبد هللا بن السائب قال قرأ النب‬
‫الخ‬
This is a Ḥadīth from Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim.
An example of a Ḥasan [Taʿlīq]
An example of a ḥasan [taʿlīq] is the following taʿlīq which is mentioned

in Kitābul Buyūʿ:
(1/285).‫ اذا بايعتَ فكِل واذا ابتعتَ فاكتل‬:‫ قال‬n ‫ويُذكر عن عثمان أ ِّن النبى‬
(Dārquṭnī and Aḥmad narrates it.)
An Example of A Ḍaʿīf Maʿmūl Bihi
An example of a ḍaʿīf [taʿlīq] is the following narration regarding

bequests:
(1/384).‫ أنه قضى بِالدَّين قبل الوصية‬n ‫ويُذكر عن النبى‬
Imām Tirmidhī v narrates it mawṣūlan from Ḥārith Al Aʿawar who

narrates it from ʿAlī. Ḥārith is weak, however, everyone practices on
this Ḥadīth.
An Example of A Ḍaʿīf Ghayr Majbūr
An example of such a ḍaʿīf taʿlīq which is not strengthened by

practicing upon it, is this taʿlīq mentioned in Kitābus Ṣalāh:
(1/117).‫ ولم يصح‬،‫يتطوع اَلمام فى مكانه‬

ِّ ‫ َل‬:‫ويُذكر عن أبي هريرة رفَعه‬
This is a narration from Sunan Abū Dāwūd. It is weak due to Layth ibn
Abī Sulaym.
238
Such narrations are very few in Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī. Imām Bukhārīvhimself

would clearly mention the weakness just as he mentioned here: ‘‫’لم يصح‬
“it is not ṣaḥīḥ.”
These are all the types of taʿlīq marfūʿ. The difference which Imām
Bukhārī v considered between the ṣegah jazam and the ṣegah tamrīḍ is
in accordance with the methodology of the muḥaqqiqīn. Many fuqahāʾ
and authors did not consider this difference, which is not good.
Bayhaqī v harshly criticized this and said that this statement of Imām
Bukhārī v: ‫ما أدخلتُ فى الجامع اَل ما ص ِّح‬- “I did not include in my Jāmiʿ except
that which is ṣaḥīḥ”, is referring to the musnad narrations and not the
taʿlīqāt.
Ḥāfiẓ v said that there was no need for this explanation which
Bayhaqīvgave because it became known from the explanation we have
mentioned that all the narrations of Bukhārī are ṣaḥīḥ, i.e., accepted in
239
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS TAʿLĪQĀT & MAWQŪFĀT OF BUKHĀRĪ
totality and there are no rejected narrations, except very few. (Hadyus
Sārī pg. 17-19) ‫وفى كالم الحافظ نظر ظاهر‬
The Total Number of Taʿlīqāt
In Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī, there are one thousand three hundred and forty-one
(1341) muʿallaq narrations. (Hadyus Sārī pg. 469)
Mawqūfāt
In the taʿlīqāt, the narrations which are ṣaḥīḥ and mawqūf on the
Ṣaḥābah g and Tābiʿīn are mentioned with the ṣegah jazam even if does
not fulfil Imām Bukhārī’s v conditions. Similarly, those weak narrations
which are supported by many chains or by being famous [are also
mentioned with the ṣegah jazam].
Imām Bukhārī v mentions the fatāwā of the Ṣaḥabah and Tābiʿīn and
their explanatory statements regarding rulings which have differences
of opinion to strengthen and support his own opinion. For this reason,
it is befitting to say that all these mawqūfāt are either mutarjam bihi
(i.e., part of the tarjumah) or mutarjam lahu (i.e., they support and
prove the tarjumah). However, the primary objective of the
compilation is to mention the authentic aḥādīth. Therefore, these are
all part of the mutarjam bihi (i.e., the tarjumah). Yes, they are all
interconnected to each other, even to the musnad aḥādīth. Based on
this, some are mufassir (explanatory) for the other and some are
mufassar (explained) by the other. These taʿlīqāt can also be called
mutarjam lahu from that angle. However, the primary objective is the
uṣūl (i.e., the aḥādīth mawṣūlah). Understand this well. This is the best
way to evade this issue as it dismisses many of the objections which
are created when the author brings such narrations. (Hadyus Sārī pg. 19)
The number of narrations from the Ṣaḥābah g and Tābiʿīn in Ṣaḥīḥ

Bukhārī are one thousand six hundred and eight (1608). (Fatḥul Bārī
13/543)
240
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS TAʿLĪQĀT & MAWQŪFĀT OF BUKHĀRĪ
Fazlur Rahman Azmi

Azaadville, South Africa
Jumādal-ʾŪlā 1410 A.H.
December 1989
241
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS THE COHERENCE OF THE CHAPTER ARRANGEMENT
The Coherence of Arrangement of The Chapters In Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī
Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar v mentions in the introduction of “Fatḥ ul Bārī” that our
Shaykh Abū Ḥafṣ ʿUmar Bulqīnī v has explained the coherence of the
arrangement of the chapters of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī. He (Ibn Ḥajar v) then
mentions this [ʿUmar Bulqīnī’s v explanation] and adds a few of his
own points. In the end, he states that unique, intricate and subtle
points have been mentioned regarding this.
ʿAllāmah Bulqīnī v said: (Ḥāfiẓ has mentioned a summary of Bulqīnī’s

discussion). (Hadyus Sārī pg. 470-473) “Imām Bukhārī v commenced the
book with ‫( كيف بدء الوحي‬How Divine Revelation Began), and not with
‫( كتاب بدء الوحي‬The Chapter Regarding the Beginning of Revelation)
because the beginning of waḥī (Divine Revelation) is also part of the
revelation.” Ḥāfiẓ v said: “Bāb (‫ )باب‬was not added to this title because
every upcoming chapter is on this same topic. This chapter is the
ummul abwāb (‫)ام اَلبواب‬. It is for this reason that it could not be divided
under different headings.” Bulqīnī mentioned: “Badʾul Waḥī was
mentioned first because Divine Revelation is the source of all good. It is
from this that Sharīʿahs, prophethood, ʾīmān and knowledge came into
existence. Qirāʿah (Recitation), rubūbiyah (Divinity) and the creation
of mankind were the topics addressed in the first verse which was
revealed. From this (verse), ʾīmān also became compulsory. For this
reason, after this [chapter Badʾul Waḥī], [the chapters of] ʾīmān and
knowledge were mentioned. Practicing comes next in line after
acquiring knowledge. From among the bodily acts of worships the
most virtuous is ṣalāḥ and ṣalāḥ is not valid without ṭahārah (ritual
purity). Therefore, the chapter regarding ṭahārah is mentioned and the
different types and kinds are mentioned. It is also possible that a
person is unable to find water and soil, so in such a case what would
they do? (The rulings regarding this are also mentioned.) Similarly,
those masāʾil are mentioned which apply to both men and women
242
equally. Thereafter, those masāʾil are mentioned which are specific to

women. (For example, the rulings of ḥayḍ (menstruation) and nifās
(lochia).)
Thereafter, the next chapter is ‘Kitābuṣ Ṣalāh’ wherein he mentions its

various types. He then mentions ‘Kitābuz Zakāh’. This order is precisely
as it is in the Ḥadīth ‫علَى خ َْم ٍس‬ ِ ْ ‫ِي‬
َ ‫اإلس َْال ُم‬ َ ‫( بُن‬Islām is based on five things).
There are differences in the nuskhāhs as to whether ‘Kitābuṣ Ṣawm or
‘Kitābul Ḥajj’ is mentioned first. Similarly, in the aḥādīth, there are also
differences in its order. He chose to title the chapter as ‘Kitābul
Manāsik’ instead of ‘Kitābul Ḥajj’ so that ʿumrah and other rulings
connected to both (ḥajj and ʿumrah) could be included. Usually, those
going for ḥajj also visit Madīnah Munawwarah. Therefore, he also
included chapters regarding visiting Madīnah Munawwarah and the
Ḥaram of Madīnah.
Ḥāfiẓ v explains that the reason for mentioning the chapter of ḥajj after
the chapter of zakāh is due to the fact that actions are either solely
connected to the physical body, solely connected to wealth or a
combination of both. Thus, he mentions ṣalāh, zakāh and then ḥajj.
Fasting is also an action, however, it is an action connected to the nafs
(inner self) and entails refraining [from doing certain actions]. It is for
this reason it is mentioned last. If reliance was placed on the Ḥadīth
ِ ْ ‫ِي‬
‫اإلس َْال ُم‬ َ ‫…بُن‬, it (Kitābuṣ Ṣawm) would have been mentioned before ḥajj
as Ibn ʿUmar h objected to his student who narrated this Ḥadīth
mentioning ḥajj first (before fasting). Although other narrations have
mentioned ḥajj first, they are riwāyat bil maʿnā narrations (narrated by
meaning). It is possible that the narrator did not know of Ibn ʿUmar’s h
objection. And Allāh knows best.”
The aforementioned chapters are regarding ‘ḥuqūqullāh’ (‫( )حقوق هللا‬the
rights of Allāh). After this, he mentions ‘ḥuqūqul ʿibād’ (‫( )حقوق العباد‬the
rights of people). In ‘Kitābul Buyūʿ’, he mentions general transactions
first. Then, he mentions bayʿ salam, which is a specific type of credit
sale. Thereafter, he mentions bayʿul qahrī, i.e., bayʿ shufʿah. After
mentioning bayʿ ikhtiyārī and bayʿul qahrī, he mentions ḥawālah.
Sometimes in a transaction, the exact item is present from one side
(the buyer or seller) either at the beginning of the contract or at the
majlis (place of the contract). Sometimes, the sale is such that it is
243
credit from both sides (the buyer and seller), and it is not necessary for
possession to be taken during the majlis nor is it necessary to specify
either of them. This is known as ḥawālah. It is for this reason that
Imām Bukhārī v then mentions [the chapter regarding] ḥawālah. In a
ḥawālah contract, the debt is transferred from one person’s
responsibility into the responsibility of another. Thus, wakālah is
mentioned thereafter as its purpose is also the protection of wealth. In
wakālah, reliance is placed on a person. Therefore, after this, he
mentions such chapters in which reliance must be placed on Allāhl.
For example,’Kitābul Ḥarth wal Muzāraʿah’ (The Chapter Regarding
Crops and Agriculture). Along with this, he mentions those rulings
which are connected to land such as ‫( موات‬reviving of barren land),
‫( غرس‬planting crops),‫( شرب‬irrigation). These chapters are all
regarding taking benefit. Thus, after this he mentions ‘Kitābul Istiqrāḍ’
(The Chapter Regarding Debts) as the theme of benefitting others is
found in this chapter. He then mentions the ruling regarding a slave
being a guardian over his master’s wealth. Thus, he cannot conduct
transactions without his (master’s) permission. From this, the rulings
regarding a slave become known.
Transactions can sometimes result in disputes and arguments.
Therefore, upon completing the mention of the chapters regarding
transactions, the chapters regarding ashkhāṣ (disputes), mulāzamat
(employment) and iltiqāṭ (picking up a lost item) are mentioned. In
iltiqāṭ, the lost item is a sharʿī amānah (trust) in the possession of the
multaqiṭ (person who picked it up). For this reason, he thereafter
mentions the chapters regarding dhulm (oppression) and ghaṣb
(usurping), where possession is taken oppressively. Thereafter, some
instances are mentioned where apparently it seems to be ghaṣb,
whereas in reality, it is a sharʿī right. For example: placing of a stick on
the neighbour’s wall, spilling wine in the street, sitting in the balcony,
digging a well in the pathway. In this regard, he mentions those rights
which are shared. Since robbery occurs in partnerships, the rules of
looting (taking an item without permission) are mentioned.
After mentioning the rulings of general partnership, the rules

regarding specific types of partnerships are mentioned i.e., ‘Kitābush
244
Shirkah’ etc. These matters are related to benefits between people.

Thereafter, those rulings which are connected to the benefits of the
transaction, i.e., rahn (pawning) is mentioned. In rahn, the need arises
to remove the burden of debt, and this is necessary from the rāhin’s
side, and it is also permissible from the murtahin’s side. For this
reason, after this, he mentions the chapter regarding iʿtāq (freeing of
slaves) which discusses slavery and the freeing of slaves. This is solely
fulfilled from the owner’s side not the slave’s. Coupled with iʿtāq, all
those things which are connected to it like umm walad, walāʾ, tadbīr,
good conduct with slaves and other rulings related to slavery are also
mentioned. For example: kitābah. Kitābah involves giving. Allāh l says:
‫ال ّللاَّ ِ الَّذِي آت َاكُ ْم‬
ِ ‫وآتُوهُم ِ ِّمن َّم‬.
َ (“And give them from the wealth of Allāh which
He has given you.”) Therefore, after this he mentions ‘Kitābul Hibah’
and along with it, he also mentions the chapters regarding ruqbā1 and
ʿumrā2. Hibah (gifting) is the handing over of the full ownership of an
item without any exchange. After this ʿāriyah is mentioned, as this also
is handing over the benefits of the item without an exchange.
Sometimes in transactions, disputes occur and there is a need for

witnesses. Therefore, upon completing the rulings of transactions and
transferral of ownership, ‘Kitābush Shahādah’ is mentioned.
Sometimes, contradictions occur among witnesses. For this reason, he
mentioned qurʿah (drawing lots) which is necessary when the matter
becomes difficult. Sometimes, when there are disputes and differences,
ṣulaḥ (reconciliation/treaty) is done and sometimes [a treaty is
contracted] even in the case where there is no dispute. For this reason,
‘Kitābuṣ Ṣulaḥ’ was mentioned next. At times, conditions are added to
the ṣulaḥ. Therefore, he then mentions ‘Kitābush Shurūṭ’. Ṣulaḥ is done
either in one’s life or after one’s death. For this reason, he then
1ʿUmrā is a gift which is given for the duration of the person’s life. It is given
on the condition that once the receiver of the gift dies, it reverts to the giver or
his heirs. However, this condition is not valid. [Qāmūsul Fiqh 4/415] [Translator]
2Ruqbā is a gift which is given on the condition that if the giver dies first, the
gift will belong to the one it is given to. However, if he dies first, the gift
reverts to the giver. [Qāmūsul Fiqh 3/489] [Translator]
245
mentions ‘Kitābul Waṣiyyah’ (The Chapter Regarding Bequests) and

‘Kitābul Waqf’ (The Chapter on Endowments).
On completing those topics which are connected to both the creator
and the creation, such topics are mentioned which are only connected
to the creator, but also requires effort i.e., jihād. This is because by
jihād the message of Allāh l is elevated and the non-believers are
humiliated since they are killed and their women, children and slaves
are taken as captives. Firstly, the virtues of jihād are mentioned.
Thereafter, such is mentioned which indicate that a mujāhid should
desire to be counted amongst the shuhadāʾ (martyrs). Therefore, ‫باب‬
‫( التحنط عند القتال‬The Chapter Regarding Applying ḥanuṭ before Battle) is
mentioned. Spies, who inform regarding the motives of the enemies, is
similar to this. Therefore, it is mentioned. Thereafter, the aḥādīth
regarding horses are mentioned as the spies are also in need to ride
horses. Thereafter the camel and mule of Nabī n is mentioned. jihād is
the male’s duty, however, some females also participate. For this
reason, the rulings [pertaining to women participating] in jihād are
mentioned. Thereafter matters related to jihād, the tools, the matters
regarding the battle and the duʿāʾs (supplications) to be recited before
the battle etc. are mentioned.
All of these discussions are amongst the narrations regarding him
being sent [to all of mankind]. For this reason, the chapter ‫دعاء النبي الناس‬
‫(الي اَلسالم‬The Invitation of Nabī n Towards Islām) is mentioned next. It
is necessary to accept the dictates of the imām (leader) as much as
possible, therefore this is mentioned. Sometimes jihād is fought
without wages and sometimes with wages, therefore, this is also
mentioned. The imām should be leading [the army]. For this reason,
the chapter ‫( مبادرت عند الفزع‬The Setting Out of The Imām Before the
People at the Time of Fright) is mentioned. The usage of means is not
against tawakkul (reliance on Allāh). For this reason, the chapter, ‫حمل‬
‫(الزاد في الغزو‬Taking Provisions in Battle) is mentioned. Thereafter, the
chapter regarding the etiquettes on travelling was mentioned. Those
returning from the battle sometimes receive māl ghanīmah (spoils of
war), therefore, the chapter regarding ‘farḍul khumus’ is mentioned.
Wealth taken from the disbelievers is either acquired by war or
through peace. For this reason, the matters related to jizyah and
dhimmi are mentioned. Thereafter, those chapters are mentioned
which are related to ṣulaḥ (peace), ʿahad (covenant) and refraining
246
from deception. Since [the knowledge of] all these matters are derived
from Divine Revelation, he mentions these three types of matters in
succession starting with the chapter regarding ‘Badʾul Waḥī’
(beginning of revelation). After mentioning these three matters, he
then mentions the chapter regarding ‘Badʾul Khalq’ (the beginning of
creation).
Ḥāfiẓ v mentioned that it seems to me that the Chapter of Badʾul Khalq
was mentioned after the Chapter of Jihād because by participating in
jihād a person loses his life. Thus, [he mentioned the Chapter of Badʾul
Khalq after Jihād] to show that this universe is ḥādith (created) and in
the end it will perish. Nothing is eternal.
(It came to the blemished and deficient mind of this unworthy

translator [i.e., Ḥazrat Mawlānā Fazlur Rahman ṣāḥib] that the reason
Badʾul Khalq, in which Jannah and Jahannam is mentioned, came after
jihād is because when a muʾmin mujāhid (believing warrior) is
martyred, he goes to Jannah and the kāfir (disbeliever) that was killed
goes to Jahannam. (Fazl 12) Jannah and Jahannam are mentioned due to
their connection with Badʾul Khalq because the final abode of the
human being is either one of these two. After mentioning Jahannam,
Iblīs and his army is mentioned due to its strong connection as they are
the fuel of Jahannam. Thereafter, jinn were mentioned. The reason the
creating of Ādam p was mentioned after the jinn and animals is
because animals were also created before Ādam p.
The Noble Prophets p are mentioned in the order in which we believe

in them. (This seems appropriate. Fazl 12) Dhūl Qarnayn is also
mentioned in this chapter because according to Imām Bukhārī v, he
was a Prophet. He was mentioned after Ibrāhīm p because he was sent
before Ibrāhīm p. (He was mentioned ‘before’ is correct. Fazl 12)
The reason Ayūb p was mentioned after Yūsuf p is because both of

them were afflicted with difficulties.
247
After the story of Yūnus p, ‫(واسئلهم عن القرية الِّتى كانت حاضرة َ البحر‬And ask
them about the village that was present at the sea) was mentioned
because the fish swallowed Yūnus p due to which he was afflicted with
difficulty but he remained patient and attained salvation. Those people
were also tested. Some of them remained patient and attained
salvation. However, others transgressed and thus, they were punished.
After mentioning Sulaymān p, Luqmān p was mentioned either

because according to Imām Bukhārī v he was also a Prophet or
because he was from amongst the disciples of Dāwūd p.
The reason Maryam o is mentioned is because according to him (Imām

Bukhārī v), she was a Prophet. After mentioning the Prophets, a few
strange incidents from the era of the Banū Isrāʾīl were mentioned.
Thereafter, some of the virtues of this ummah were mentioned
although they are not from among the Prophets.
He began by mentioning [the virtues of] the Quraysh as the Qurʾān was
revealed in their language. When mentioning [the tribes of] Aslam and
Ghifār, he also mentioned the acceptance of Islām of Abū Dhar z as he
was the first to accept Islām from that tribe. He then mentions the
names and sublime qualities and conduct of Muḥammad n and he also
mentions the signs of his prophethood. Then, the first to accept Islām
among the Ṣaḥābah g were the Muhājirīn and Anṣār. The Muhājirīn
accepted Islām before the Anṣār. Thus, they were mentioned first.
Amongst them, Abū Bakr z was the first [to accept Islām]. Thus, he was
mentioned first. The Anṣār are mentioned after the Muhājirīn, and then
all the other Ṣaḥābah g are mentioned.
Before mentioning what the Ṣaḥābah g did to proclaim and spread the
word of Allāh with the Messenger of Allāh n, he mentions the
conditions of the period of jāhiliyyah (period of ignorance) which came
to an end by prophethood. He then mentions the way the mushrikīn
(polytheists) ridiculed the Messenger of Allāh n and the Ṣaḥābahg. He
then mentions the condition of the Messenger of Allāh n before the
migration to Abyssinia. He then mentions the migration to Abyssinia,
the journey to miʿrāj etc.
248
He then mentions the migration to Madīnah and the battles in the

order which is correct according to his opinion. He begins the chapter
of ‘Maghādhī; by mentioning ʿAbdullāh ibn Salām z in hope that this be
a good omen for peace. After mentioning the battles, he mentions other
delegations and Ḥajjatul Widāʿ and then mentions the approach of the
death of the Messenger of Allāh n and his death. The Messenger of
Allāh n passed away at such a time when the Sharīʿah he brought was
extremely clear and complete. The Qurʾān was also completed. Thus, he
mentions ‘Kitābut Tafsīr’ after that. He then mentions the virtues of the
Qurʾān and etiquettes regarding its recitation.
Memorising and studying the Kitāb and Sunnah (Qurʾān and Ḥadīth),
studying it’s tafsīr and discussing its rulings are the means by which
the Dīn will be preserved in the entire world and the rulings will
remain despite the changing and passing of time. It is from this that
eternal life will be obtained. For this reason, after this, nikāḥ is
mentioned. It is through marriage that the human progeny will spread.
People who will memorize and preserve the Qurʾān will be born.
Thereafter, breast feeding is mentioned because the impermissibility
of marriage is connected to it. After that there is the mention of
permissible and impermissible women, then in-law relations, ḥarām
(forbidden) and makrūḥ (disliked) marriages, proposals, contracts,
dowry (mahr), guardian (walī), beating the drum (daff), walīmah
(wedding feast), conditions in a nikāḥ and the remaining details
regarding the walīmah. Thereafter, he mentions kind treatment to
women, and he then mentions divorce and marriage to a disbeliever. In
the Qurʾān, īlāʾ is mentioned after marriage to the mushrik, so Imām
Bukhārī v also mentioned it in this order. Then, ẓihār is mentioned,
which is a temporary separation. Thereafter, liʿān is mentioned, which
is a permanent separation. Then, ʿiddah and murājiʿah are mentioned.
Then, intercourse outside of marriage is mentioned. Thereafter, the
chapters regarding the wages of a prostitute and invalid nikāḥ are
mentioned. Then, mutʿah is mentioned. Upon completing the mention
of the rulings relating to nikāḥ, nafaqah (maintenance) was mentioned,
which is directly connected to the husband. Since nafaqah is related to
food, ‘Kitābul Aṭʿimah’ is mentioned after it which includes the rulings
249
and etiquettes of eating. Thereafter, mention of a specific type of food,

ʿaqīqah, is mentioned. In ʿaqīqah, slaughtering is necessary. Therefore,
‘Kitābudh Dhabāʾiḥ’ was mentioned after the chapter regarding
ʿaqīqah. Hunting is also a type of slaughtering. Thus, the rulings
regarding hunting are mentioned after [Kitābudh Dhabḥ]. Some
slaughtering is only done once a year. Therefore, after this ‘Kitābul
ʾUḍḥiyah’ is mentioned. After eating, drinking is necessary. Thus,
‘Kitābul Ashribah’ is mentioned after [Kitābul Aṭʿimah]. Sometimes,
sicknesses develop from eating and drinking, due to which visiting a
doctor becomes necessary. For this reason, ‘Kitābuṭ Ṭib’ is mentioned
after [aṭʿimah and ashribah], in which the reward for being ill and
those things which are permissible, disliked or impermissible to use
for cure, treatment and ruqyah are mentioned.
After completing the chapters regarding eating, drinking, medicine and

treatment, the masāʾil of clothing, beautification, fragrances etc. are
mentioned which are from amongst the etiquettes of the nafs (personal
hygiene). Thereafter, the chapters regarding adab, bir and ṣilah (good
manners, kindness and ties of kinship) and istiʾdhān (asking
permission) are mentioned. By salām and istiʾdhān, the doors of this
world are opened. For this reason, the chapter regarding daʿwāh was
thereafter brought which opens up the doors of the heavens. Duʿāʾ is
also a means of forgiveness. For this reason, the chapter regarding
istighfār (seeking forgiveness) was mentioned. By seeking forgiveness,
one’s sins are forgiven. For this reason, the chapter regarding tawbah
(repentance) is mentioned. Thereafter, he mentions the adhkār and
istighfār which are specified for a certain time and also those which are
not specified. (This is because this is also a form of dhikr like istighfār.)
Guidance is attained from duʿāʾ and dhikr. For this reason, mawāʿiẓ
(exhortation), zuhd (abstinence) and many of the conditions of the day
of Qiyāmah were thereafter mentioned. Then, it was mentioned that all
matters are in the hands of Allāh, so it was said that the chapters
regarding qadr (Divine decree) and the matters pertaining to qadr
were mentioned. Vows are also connected to qadr. For this reason, the
250
chapter regarding vows was thereafter mentioned. There is also an

expiation (kaffārāh) for [breaking] vows. For this reason, oaths were
added. In oaths and vows, kaffārāh is needed. For this reason, the
chapter regarding kaffārah was mentioned.
Upon completing the mentioning of the worldly matters of the people,

the conditions after death were mentioned and the chapters regarding
inheritance and its laws were mentioned. Upon completing the
mention of the rulings other than jināyāh, the rulings regarding those
connected to crimes are mentioned. The chapter regarding ḥudūd is
mentioned and in the end the laws regarding apostates are mentioned.
Sometimes an apostate is not considered a disbeliever when he was
forced. For this reason, the chapter regarding ikrāh (coercion) is
mentioned. Sometimes the one who is being forced uses a ḥīlah
(strategy) and keeps the reality hidden in his heart. For this reason, the
chapter regarding Ḥiyl is mentioned in which both the permissible and
forbidden types of ḥīlah are mentioned. Sometimes, certain things
remain hidden in ḥīlahs. For this reason, the interpretation of dreams
is thereafter mentioned because [the interpretation of] dreams are
hidden even though it is apparent to the interpreter. With regards to
dreams it is said: ِ َّ ‫الرؤْ يَا الَّتِي أ َ َريْن َاكَ إِ ََّل فِتْنَة ً لِلن‬
‫اس‬ ُّ ‫( َو َما َجعَ ْلنَا‬And We
have made what We brought you to see only as a test for the people).
For this reason, the chapter regarding fitan (trials) is thereafter
mentioned. Sometimes, the rulers are also affected by these trials.
Thus, they make an effort to eradicate these trials. For this reason,
‘Kitābul Aḥkām’ is thereafter mentioned, in which there is mention of
the condition of the leaders, rulers and judges.
Some people also wish for leadership and authority. Thus, ‘Kitābut
Tamannī (wishes) is thereafter mentioned. The laws of the rulers are
mostly based on the akhbār āḥād. For this reason, he mentions the
chapter proving the validity of using a khabar wāḥid as evidence. All
laws and rulings require the Qurʾān and Sunnah. Therefore, the chapter
regarding Iʿtiṣām bil Qurʾān wa Sunnah (Holding on to the Qurʾān and
Sunnah) is mentioned in which ijtihād and istinbāṭ (deriving rulings)
251
from the Qurʾān and Sunnah are mentioned, and the dislike of
disagreement and disunity is stated. The basis of the preservation of
Islām lies within [the belief] of tawḥīd. It is for this reason, he ended
the book with chapter on tawḥīd. The last thing which will attest to
one’s success and failure is whether the scale [with one’s deeds] will be
heavy or light. It is for this reason he dedicated the last chapter to this
and titled it:
{‫َّللا تعالى {ونضع الموازين القسط ليوم القيامة} وأ َّن أعمال بني آدم وقولهم توزن‬
َّ ‫باب قول‬
Chapter: the statement of Allāh l “And we shall set up balances on the Day of
Resurrection” and that the deeds and statements of the sons of Ādam will be
weighed.
Imām Bukhārī v started the book with the Ḥadīth of ‫انِّما األعمال بانيات‬
(Actions are judged by intentions) and ended it with ‫أعمال بني آدم توزن‬
(The actions of the son of Ādam will be weighed). By doing this, he
indicates that only those deeds which are done for the sake of Allāh l
are accepted.
In the last chapter, the following Ḥadīth is mentioned:
‫َّللا‬ َّ ‫ ثقيلتان في الميزان سبحان‬،‫ خفيفتان على اللّسان‬،‫الرحمن‬

َّ ‫ سبحان‬،‫َّللا وبحمده‬ َّ ‫كلمتان حبيبتان إلى‬
.‫العظيم‬
“(There are) two words which are beloved to the Most Beneficent
(Allāh) and very light (easy) on the tongue, but very heavy in the
balance. They are: ‘Subḥān Allāhi wa-bi ḥamdiḥi'' and ''Subḥān Allāhil -
ʿAdhīm’.”
In kalimatān there is indication towards the ease with which these

words are recited and encouragement [to recite these words]. The
mention of ḥabībatan is to encourage one to recite these words
because these two words are beloved to Allāh l and in khafīfatān,
there is encouragement because this action is very easy. The reward
for this is expressed in thaqīlaṭān. The order of arrangement of this
Ḥadīth is in a very unique and great style. That is, the love of Allāh l
252
takes precedence. [After the love of Allāh l enters a person’s heart], he

then remembers Allāh l and consequently, the dhikr becomes light on
his tongue. After this, the reward of these two words is until the Day of
Resurrection. Additionally, the meaning of these two words come at
the end of the duʿāʾ of the people of Jannah. Allāh l says:
.‫رب العالمين‬
ّ ‫دعواهم فيها سبحانك اللهم وتحيّتهم فيها سالم وآخر دعواهم ان الحمد ہلل‬
[This is a summary of Shaykh Al-Bulqinī’s v statement.]
.‫ جزاه هللا خيراً بمنّه وكرمه‬،‫ولقد أبدى فيه لطائف وعجائب‬
Fazlur Rahman Azmi

May Allāh l forgive him, his parents, his teachers, his students, and all the believing men
and women.
Azadville, South Africa-Before Jumuʿah
7th Shaʿbān 1411 A.H. 22nd February 1991
.‫ب العالمبن‬ ّ ّ‫وصلّى هللا على الن‬
ّ ‫والحمد ہلل ر‬. ‫بي األ ّم ّي وآله وصحبه أجمعين‬
253
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS BUKHĀRĪ’S TARĀJIM
Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī’s Tarājim (Chapter Titles)
Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī’s tarājim are unique. ʿAllāmah Kashmīrī v said: “Imām

Bukhārī v was the first person to establish chapter titles and he
excelled above all in this regard. No one else before him established
such chapter titles and no one else after him could copy or mimic his
style. He is the one who opened this door and closed it as well. He also
mentions Qurʾānic verses which are connected to the chapter title and
sometimes he examined the related Qurʾānic verses.
He also mentions subsidiary rulings (furuʿī masāʾil) and he also
highlights the method of deriving them through the aḥādīth. He also
draws attention to the aspects of fiqh within the Qurʾān. Rather, he
establishes fiqh from the Qurʾān. In this manner he showed the
connection between the Qurʾān, Ḥadīth and fiqh.
Imām Bukhārī v manifested his proficiency with regards to ijtihād and
istinbāṭ and the excellence of his profound intellect was displayed in
the tarājim. It is for this reason that it has been said that: “ ‫فقه البخارى فى‬
‫”تراجمه‬- “The fiqh of Bukhārī is in his chapter titles.” In this manner,
fiqh, uṣūl fiqh and ʿilm kalām are different branches of knowledge
within the author’s tarājim which he indicates towards with great
brevity. Thus, to understand this is not within everyone’s ability.”
(Fayḍul Bārī 1/40)
Kirmānī v has stated: “I have explained the connection between the

aḥādīth and the tarjumah in every chapter. This is such a matter which
the successful and accomplished scholars and the greatest of experts in
every era remained incapable of doing and thus, they left it out by
presenting excuses.” He then mentioned Abul Walīd Bājī’s v statement.
(Sharḥ Kirmānī pg. 4)
Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar v wrote the following regarding the tarājim of Bukhārī
in “Hadyus Sārī”:
The tarājim of Imām Bukhārī v are of different types:
254
1. If he finds a Ḥadīth that is connected to the chapter and it meets his

conditions, he mentions it with ṣegah taḥdīth even though the
connection may be vague. He also accepts ʿanʿanah (‫)عنعنہ‬
narrations once his conditions are found.
2. If he does not find a Ḥadīth which fulfils his conditions, but it is
worthy of being used as an evidence, he does not mention it with
the ṣegah of taḥdīth. Rather, he mentions it in another form. The
taʿlīqāt are also mentioned for this same reason as will be
mentioned.
3. If he does not find any ṣaḥīḥ Ḥadīth which fulfils Imām Bukhārī’s v
or anyone else’s conditions of authenticity, however, the narration
can be used for istinbāṭ and a group of people gives precedence to
it over qiyās, then he also collected this type of narration and used
its wording or meaning to establish the chapter title. Thereafter, he
would mention a Qurʾānic verse or Ḥadīth which supports this
Ḥadīth.
In this manner, the aḥādīth mentioned in the chapter titles are of three
types. Details of this will be mentioned later. (Hadyus Sārī pg. 9)
He further mentioned the following details: (see pg. 13,14)
1. Sometimes the chapter title is within the Ḥadīth that is mentioned

[under its chapter]. The entire Ḥadīth, a portion of it or its meaning
is mentioned by establishing it as the chapter title. Majority of the
time, he does this when more than one possible meaning can be
derived from the chapter title. Thus, one meaning is fixed and
established by the Ḥadīth which is mentioned under the chapter.
2. Sometimes, it is vice versa. Meaning, there is more than one
possible meaning for the Ḥadīth mentioned in the chapter. Thus, he
specifies one meaning for the Ḥadīth by adding a restriction to the
chapter title. In this way, the chapter title explains the meaning of
the Ḥadīth. For instance, if a jurist says that the meaning of this
khāṣ (specific) Ḥadīth is ʿām (general) or that this ʿām Ḥadīth has
this khāṣ meaning due to some ʿillah or that this muṭlaq (general)
255
is muqayyid (restricted) or that this restriction is not necessary,

and it is not iḥtirāzī. In the same way, he explains the explanation
of a mushkil, the tafsīr of a ghāmiḍ (ambiguous), the taʿwīl of a
ẓāhir, the tafṣīl of a mujmal. Such instances are usually extremely
difficult. For this reason, a group of fuḍalāʾ says: “ ‫فقه البخارى فى‬
‫”تراجمه‬.
3. Imām Bukhārī v usually does this when he does not find any
Ḥadīth with a clear meaning, according to his conditions to fulfil his
objective.
4. Sometimes he does such to sharpen the intellects so that the
hidden meanings of the Ḥadīth can be derived.
5. He usually adopts the method of doing the tafsīr of the ghāmiḍ or
the taʿwīl of the ẓāhir in the case where a mufassir Ḥadīth is
mentioned before or after this chapter. It is as though, he is
indicating or referencing towards that [Ḥadīth].
6. There are many places where he establishes the chapter title in the
form of a question. For example: ‫ باب هل يكون كذا ومن قال كذا‬or one
similar to this. This is done when one form cannot be taken with
certitude. The objective of mentioning this is to determine whether
this command is established or not. Thereafter, he either
establishes it, negates it, or establishes the possibility of both.
7. Sometimes one possibility is apparent however, his objective is
that there is room for contention. He intends to show that in this
case there is such a possibility or contradiction which dictates one
to remain silent on. He does this in such instances where he
intends to be concise or so that the mustadil can have a difference
of opinion.
8. In some places, the chapter title appears to be very ordinary and
trivial, which does not seem to serve any purpose. However, after
pondering, its benefit and purpose is recognised. For example,
‫( باب قول الرجل ما صلِّينا‬The Chapter Regarding The statement of a man:
“We have not prayed..”) (Bukhārī pg. 89)
His objective is to refute the opinion of those who consider this to
be makrūh. Another example exactly like this is: ‫باب قول الرجل فاتَتْنا‬
256
‫الصلوة‬. (The Chapter Regarding The statement of a man: “We have

missed the prayer...”) (Bukhārī pg. 88)
9. Sometimes, he mentions a specific command along with a specific
occasion in the chapter title. For example, ‫باب استياك اَلمام بحضرة رعيته‬
(The Chapter Regarding the Imām Using the Miswāk In the
Presence of His Followers). (This chapter is not in Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī.)
Using the miswāk is something which some people consider it to be
an insignificant matter which is related to one’s personal life. It is
for this reason that they consider it better to hide this. However,
the Messenger of Allāh n used the miswāk in front of the people.
From this, it is deduced that using the miswāk is from amongst the
matters regarding cleanliness and not from another chapter. Ibn
Daqīqul ʿĪd v mentions this. (Hadyus Sārī pg. 14)
Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar v has mentioned: “I have not seen this chapter in Ṣaḥīḥ
Bukhārī. Perhaps (Ibn Daqīqul ʿĪd) simply mentioned this as an
example.” (Muqaddamah Irshādus Sārī by Qasṭalānī pg. 28)
Shaykh Muḥammad Zakariyyā v has written: “This statement of Ḥāfiẓ

Ibn Ḥajar v is not in this copy of the introduction of “Fatḥul Bārī” which
we have. However, the statement is true because I have also not seen
this chapter in Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī. Yes, in his Sunan, Imām Nasāʾī v
mentions the chapter title as follows: ‫( باب يستاك اَلمام بحضرة رعيته‬The
Chapter Regarding the Imām Using the Miswāk In the Presence of His
Followers). (Nasāʾī pg. 5) The details of this have been mentioned in aṣl
number 54. (Al Abwāb wat Tarājim pg. 14, footnote 1) Ḥazrat Shaykh v also
mentioned that an example similar to this can possibly be: ‫باب دفع السواك‬
‫( الي اَلكبر‬The Chapter Regarding Giving the Miswāk to the Eldest).
(Bukhārī pg. 38) because it indicates towards a specific occasion which
occurred while in an awakened state or in a dream. Ḥazrat Shaykh v
also mentions other examples. (See Al Abwāb wat Tarājim pg. 15)
We think that the following chapters are also accurate examples:
257
‫( باب البول عند صاحبه‬The Chapter Regarding Urinating Besides One’s

Companion) (pg. 35) and ‫( باب غسل المراة أباها الدم عن وجهه‬The Chapter
Regarding Washing Blood By a Woman from her Father’s Face) (pg.
38).
10. Sometimes, he used such words in his chapter titles which indicate
towards the Ḥadīth which is not according to Imām Bukhārī’s v
conditions. Alternatively, he mentions a Ḥadīth which is not ṣaḥīḥ
according to his conditions as the chapter title. He then mentions a
Ḥadīth in the chapter which gives the same meaning that is
mentioned in the chapter title. Sometimes he does this explicitly
and sometimes implicitly. For example, in: ‫( باب اَلمراء من قريش‬The
Chapter Regarding the Rulers Are from the Quraysh).
This is (the wording of) Sayyidunā ʿAlī’s z Ḥadīth which is not
according to Imām Bukhārī’s v conditions. However, in this
chapter, he mentions the following Ḥadīth: ‫( َل يزال وال من قريش‬The
caliphate will remain in the Quraysh).
This Ḥadīth supports the chapter title.
11. Similarly, he mentions the following chapter: ‫باب اثنان فما فوقها جماعة‬
(The Chapter Regarding Two Are More Persons Are Considered as
A Group (for congregational prayer)).
This is (the wording of) Abū Mūsā Ashʿarī’s z Ḥadīth which is not
according to Imām Bukhārī’s v conditions. However, in this chapter
the following Ḥadīth is mentioned which supports this: ‫فأذنا وأقيما‬
(…let the two of you call the adhān and let the two of you call the
iqāmah…).
12. Sometimes he mentions the words of such a Ḥadīth as his chapter
title which is not ṣaḥīḥ according to Imām Bukhārī’s v conditions.
Coupled with this, he mentions a verse or narration. By doing this,
it is as if he is saying that there is no Ḥadīth according to my
conditions in this chapter.
Due to the lack of awareness and understanding regarding these subtle
objectives, those who are superficial in their thinking believe that the
author left the book without editing it. However, those who ponder
258
upon it, will understand it and those who make efforts will be
successful. (Hadyus Sārī pg. 14)
Mawlānā Muḥammad Zakariyyā Khāndelwī v has written that Ḥāfiẓ
Ibn Ḥajar v mentions eleven (11) uṣūl (principles). However, there are
more than eleven in reality. (Al Abwāb wat Tarājim pg. 6)
The summary of this discussion is that Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī’s tarājim are
confusing to the mind by which the intellects become bewildered.
Someone beautifully mentions:
ِ ‫أعيا فُحو َل العِلم َح ُّل ُر ُم‬

‫وزها‬
‫أبداه فى األبواب من أسرار‬
Unravelling its secrets exhausted the masters of knowledge.
There will always be secrets within its chapters.
The reason for this is that Imām Bukhārī v revised and edited his
tarājim between the noble grave and the minbar (pulpit) of the
Messenger of Allāh n. He also performed two rakʿahs ṣalāh for each
tarjumah. Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī attained this rank and status due to this.
‫ہر مدعی کے واسطے دار و رسن‬ ‫یہ مرتبہ بلند مال جس کو مل گیا‬
‫کہاں‬
259
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS BOOKS WRITTEN ON BUKHĀRĪ’S TARĀJIM
Books Written on the Tarājim of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī
1. Al Mutawārī ʿAlā Tarājimul Bukhārī (‫)المتوارى على تراجم البخارى‬

Author: Nāṣir-ud-Dīn Aḥmad ibn Al-Munayyir Khaṭīb Al-Askandariyah
v (death: 683 A.H.)
Four hundred (400) of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī’s tarājim have been discussed in

this book. Badr-ud -Dīn ibn Jamāʿah v compiled an abridged version of
it and made some additions. Nāṣir-ud-Dīn’s brother, Zayn-ud-Dīn ʿAlī
ibn Muḥammad Al-Manṣūr ibn Al-Munayyar v also went into deep
discussion on the tarājim in his ten-volume commentary. (Hadyus Sārī pg.
14 and Muqaddamah Lāmiʿ pg. 134)
2. Fakkul Agrāḍul Bukhārī Al- Mubhamatu Fil Jamaʿ baynal Ḥadīth

wat Tarjumah (‫)فكّ أغراض البخارى المبهمة فى الجمع بين الحديث والترجمة‬
Author: Muḥammad ibn Manṣūr ibn Jamāʿah Sajalmāsī Maghribī v. He

discussed approximately one hundred chapter titles. (Hadyus Sārī pg. 14)
3. Tarjumānut Tarājim (‫)ترجمان التراجم‬

Author: Abū ʿAbdullāh ibn Rushayd v (death: 721 A.H.) (Muqaddamah
Lāmiʿ)
Ḥāfiẓ v has written: “I came across the first volume of Abū ʿAbdullāh
ibn Rushayd Sabtī’s v book, “Tarjumānit Tarājim” and it ended at the
chapter of fasting. Had it been completed, it would have been very
beneficial. It is still very beneficial although it is incomplete.” (Hadyus Sārī
pg. 14)
4. Taʿlīqul Maṣābaiḥ ʿAlā Abwāb Al-Jāmiʿuṣ Ṣaḥīḥ

(‫)تعليق المصابيح على أبواب الجامع الصحيح‬
Author: ʿAllāmah Badr-ud-Dīn Muḥammad ibn Abī Bakr Al
Askandarānī Al-Damāminī v (death: 828 A.H.)
260
The author of “Kashfuẓ Ẓunūn” included this book among the

commentaries of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī and wrote that ʿAllāmah Damāminī v
wrote this book for the king of India, Aḥmad Shāh ibn Muḥammad
Mudhaffar Shāh. (Muqaddamah Lāmiʿ pg. 90)
ʿAllāmah Ibn Khaldūn v wrote in his introduction that many

commentaries have been written on Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī, however this
ummah still remains indebted to it. Its right has not been fulfilled.
Sakhāwī v wrote in his book, “Al-Ḍawʾ-ul-Lāmiʾ”: “My teacher wrote
“Fatḥul Bārī” and fulfilled the right of Bukhārī on behalf of the ummah.”
(Taqrīr Mawlānā Shabbir Aḥmad ʿUthmānī printed in Dabhel pg. 22)
In “Kashfuẓ Ẓunūn”, Mullā Kātib Chalpī v wrote that Ibn Khaldūn v

quoted this from many of his mashāyikh (teachers). I say that perhaps
this debt was fulfilled by the researchers, Ibn Ḥajar, Qasṭalānī, and
ʿAynī.‫( رحمهم هللا‬Kashfuẓ Ẓunūn pg. 641)
However, a portion of the debt remains to be fulfilled. Meaning, the

responsibility of [explaining] the Ḥadīth has been lifted, however, the
responsibility of [explaining] the tarājim still remains. Ḥazrat Shāh
Walīullāh v wrote a treatise on the tarājim of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī. Shāh
Ṣāḥib was the accepted Imām of his time. However, his teacher said
that the responsibility still remains. (Taqrīr ʿUthmānī pg. 23)
5. Sharḥ Tarājim Abwāb Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī (‫)شرح تراجم أبواب صحيح بخارى‬
Author: Shāh Walīuullāh Muḥaddith Dehlawī v. This book is printed

along with Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī.
6. During Ḥazrat Shaykhul Hind’s v stay in Malta, compiled a

translation of the Qurʾān and also a commentary on the tarājim of
Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī. He began this work but was unable to complete it.
(Taqrīr ʿUthmānī pg. 23)
Ḥazrat Shaykhul Hind v compiled fifteen (15) principles and
prepared an index of the Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī’s tarājim. Ḥazrat Mawlānā
Ḥusayn Aḥmad Madanī v published it. This can be read in “Imdād-
261
ul-Bārī”, volume 4 page 9-26. This has also been translated in

Arabic in “Al-Abwāb wat Tarājim”. Shaykul Islām Mawlānā Husayn
Aḥmad Madanī v published it under the title “Al-Abwāb wat
Tarājim”.
7. Shaykhul Ḥadīth, Mawlānā Muḥammad Zakariyyā v completed this
task, and he discussed each tarājim in detail in the book titled, “Al-
Abwāb wat Tarājim”. The truth is that with this service, the right of
the tarājim has been fulfilled completely. Ḥazrat v mentions
seventy (70) principles which were also mentioned in
“Muqaddamah Lāmiʿ”. The principles of Ḥāfiẓ v and Shaykhul Hind
v were also included amongst them. By this service, the debt of the
tarājim of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī has been fulfilled.ً ‫ وجزاهم هللا خيرا‬،‫فالحمد ہلل على ذالك‬
‫عنّا وعن جميع طلبة العلم‬.
We are also including the fifteen principles of Shaykhul Hind v as one of the chapters in our book.
262
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS FIFTEEN PRINCIPLES
Fifteen Principles of Ḥazrat Shaykh-ul-Hind v 1
‫بسم هللا الرحمن الرحيم‬
ِّ ‫اللهم َل سهل اَلِّ ما جعلته سهال وأنت تجع ُل الحزن اذا شئت سهالً وَل حو َل وَل قوة اَل باهلل العل‬
‫ى‬
‫ى هللا على سيدنا وموَلنا محم ٍد على آله وصحبه وسلِّم‬
ِّ ‫ وصل‬،‫العظيم‬
‫ذكر‬ ‫رفعت آں شیریں قلندر خوش کہ درا طوار سیر‬

‫تسبیح ملک در حلقہ زنّارداشت‬
Principles
‫ ! امابعد‬This unjust and ignorant servant is appealing in the courts to

[the people of] understanding and justice. For quite a long time, it has
been my heart’s desire and the request of some noble, special servants
that I try writing (in the name of Allāhl) regarding the tarājim of the
most authentic book after the Book of Allāh (the Qurʾān) which has
always been the goal of the akābir ʿulamāʾ. These tarājim are
considered to be the lifelong hard work and earnings of the ʿAmīrul
Muʾminīn of Ḥadīth and a major pillar of the most authentic book.
There is no doubt that an equivalent to the lengthy, concise and
moderate commentaries which have been written on this blessed and
sacred book can rarely be found and it is something for Muslims to take
pride in.
.‫جزاهم هللا عنِّا أحسن الجزاء وأفض َل الجزاء‬
May Allāh l reward them with the best and most virtuous of rewards.
However, the respected akābir did not find the opportunity to ponder
upon and give extra attention to conduct research on the tarājim and
remain consistent in doing this task due to being preoccupied in
1This treatise had become very rare. However, by including it in our book, we
have made it easily available. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
263
research in all fields of knowledge, tafsīr, hadīth, fiqh, aqīdah, asmāʾ

rijāl, lughah among others. Thus, the respected akābir found it more
befitting to suffice on the amount necessary. If anyone had done such,
we have been deprived of it until now. In summary, the discussions
regarding the tarājim in the available commentaries are not sufficient
for us. Undoubtedly, there is a need for such a person who will be able
to offer his services in this field; one who will be able to consistently
exert his full efforts in this task with deep thought and ponder upon
the available commentaries of the akābir and choose the opinion which
is most deserving of acceptance. However, as is known to everyone,
our condition is such that we can never be worthy of being successful,
even in the smallest of ways in fulfilling this important and great task.
What can be achieved by the mere yearning of the heart? Thus, at that
time I was unable to do anything. I was fortunate to come across a copy
of “Hujjatullāh ʿalal ʿĀlamīn”, Shāh Walīullāh Dehlawī’s v brief booklet
on this topic which was published in Hyderabad. Upon seeing this
booklet, I began to see life in my dying hopes and dreams and the
unripe fruits began to ripen.2 By reading this booklet, it became clear
that many of the author’s v mysteries and secrets remain hidden in
corners. The booklet is extremely astonishing. However, because of its
conciseness, to take full benefit is definitely difficult. However, this
long desire and zeal overlooked and disregarded all difficulties and
preparations to begin this task was made. However, my helplessness
and desperation are not such that it could be overlooked. Thus, I was
compelled to select a few knowledgeable and proficient individuals in
this field so that this task can be completed in the best possible
manner.
.‫حسبنا هللا ونعم الوكيل‬
Sufficient for us is Allāh and He is the best disposer of our affairs.
2Meaning, the intent [to write regarding this] became firm. [Extracted from Ifādātush
Shaykh]
264
Now, whatever we mention has all been derived from the research of
the elder scholars. However, where necessary, whatever extra is
understood will also be mentioned. If there is an error, then there is no
need to explain the reason. We, ourselves, are the reason [for this
error]. If it is correct then it is from the grace of Allāhland the
blessings of the elder scholars.
.‫ وهللا ُ ال ُموفِِّق وال ُمعِين‬،‫حروم‬

ُ ‫وفى أموالِهم حق لِلسِّائل وال َم‬
And of their wealth there is a rightful share for those who ask and the
destitute. And Allāh is the one who gives the ability, and He is the helper.
Firstly, we wish to mention those principles which the author

considered in the chapter titles and are also applicable to the other
parts of the book.
It is a known fact that the respected author did not document these
principles, rather, the researchers derived these instinctively or after
pondering on the chapter titles. For this reason, these principles will
always be as the Persian saying goes: ‫ہر آنکہ دریافت مزید برآں نمود‬.3 Thus, it
becomes apparent that even now, if someone after pondering, adds
such a valid point to the principles which is beneficial and coincides
with the objectives of the author, then that would be accepted and
appreciated. It will never be rejected.
ُ ‫وَل ت َن‬
ُ4‫ فنَقُو ُل وبه نَستَعِين‬،‫ظروا الى َمن قَال‬
3A person will derive in proportion to the amount of effort he puts in. The
person who exerts more effort, will derive more principles.
4Do not say that no one until now has written regarding this. How can such a
statement be made? After pondering upon the principles, whenever a point is
added which is beneficial and useful in finding a connection between the
tarjumah and the Ḥadīth of the chapter and it supports the author’s objective,
then it is worthy of being accepted and valued. This is because sometimes, a
265
And do not look at those who say, so we say and from Him we seek
help.
Fifteen (15) Principles
(1) Sometimes, the author v, uses the wording of the Ḥadīth or he uses
someone’s opinion or statement as the tarjumah. However, its
apparent coinciding meaning is not the objective. Rather, that which is
established by indication is the compiler’s objective. Therefore, the
evidence that he will mention [under that chapter] will be according to
this hidden objective. It is not necessary for it to be clearly connected
to the tarjumah. Those who consider the apparent tarjumah as the
objective will not be able to give an acceptable reconciliation even after
lots of hard work and effort.
The first chapter which the author v mentioned is:

‫( باب كيف كان بدء الوحى الى رسول هللا صلي هللا عليه وسلم‬The Chapter regarding
How Divine Revelation Began). Under this chapter, he mentions six
aḥādīth. In some of them, revelation is not even mentioned and there is
no mention regarding the beginning of revelation in most of them. The
beginning of waḥī in Ḥirāʾ is only mentioned in one Ḥadīth. It is for this
reason that some scholars have clearly stated: “Many of the aḥādīth of
the chapter are not connected to waḥī nor the beginning of waḥī. So,
how can the chapter be titled: ‘Badʾul Waḥī’-the beginning of Divine
Revelation?”
Majority of the scholars have exerted their efforts in finding a

connection by making various taʿwīlāt (interpretations) which are
mentioned in the commentaries in detail. However, the reality is that
none of the researchers have found a connection which is befitting for
the author’s great status by which all the aḥādīth will reconcile with
great point emanates from the lips of a person of low status. [Extracted from
Ifādātush Shaykh]
266
the tarjumah without any doubt. If this is the case in the beginning of
the book, how will it be in the other parts of the book?
ِ ‫قیاس ُکن ز ُگلستاں َمن‬

‫بہار ُمرا‬
However, upon pondering on the aḥādīth mentioned in this chapter

and from the statements of Ḥazrat Shāh Walīullāh ṣāḥib v and others, it
becomes known that the author’s primary objective is not to mention
the beginning of waḥī. Rather, his primary objective is to highlight the
greatness of waḥī and to show that it is free from mistakes and errors,
and thus, it is binding upon a person to accept and follow its dictates.
This is befitting and beneficial to mention in the beginning of the book.
It includes both waḥī matlū and ghayr matlū. The mabdaʾ
(commencement of waḥī) is also general; whether it is regarding the
time or the place, or referring to the character or the conditions. In
short, the objective is to highlight all the aspects of waḥī. Now, [after
this is understood], the connection between the aḥādīth and the
tarjumah can be clearly seen. When the occasion arises, we will discuss
it in details inshaʾAllāh. In summary, it is important and necessary to
understand the objective of the author. It is very beneficial and useful
in many instances.
(2) It is a known fact that in his entire book, the author does not repeat
any aḥādīth nor any tarjumah. If repetition does occur, it is considered
to be a mistake. Repetition of the tarjumah refers to the objective being
the same in both the tarjumahs. It does not refer to the wordings of the
tarjumah being the same. For example, in Kitābul ʿIlm, there are two
chapters with the title, ‘Bāb Faḍlul ʿIlm’. Regarding this, the senior
scholars (akābir) have stated that what is meant by faḍl in one of the
chapters is not meant in the other chapter.5 Therefore, it is not
considered to be repeated. However, this implies that in the cases
5In the first chapter, it means virtue and in the second chapter it means the
knowledge which remains. Fazl
267
where the objective is the same, repetition is not negated by the

changing of one or two words until and unless the objectives are
different. The objection regarding repetition remains; simply the
changing of some words is of no benefit to differentiate between the
two. For example: in the beginning of the book, he mentions the
chapter: ‫باب كيف كان بدء الوحى الى رسول هللا صلي هللا عليه وسلم‬
(The Chapter Regarding How Divine Revelation Began). Thereafter, in
Kitāb Faḍāʾil Qurʾān he mentions the chapter: ‫وأو ُل ما‬ ِّ ‫باب کيف نزول الوحي‬
‫نزَ ل‬. (The Chapter Regarding How Waḥī was Revealed and the First
Revelation to be Revealed) Simply by the changing of some words, it
does not negate repetition. Rather, it is necessary to highlight the
differences between the objectives of each chapter.6
(3) It is apparent that the tarjumatul bāb is the muddaʿā (claim) and
the Ḥadīth is the evidence for it. However, in many chapters, the author
v has added such a clause or explanation which has not been
mentioned in the Ḥadīth. Thus, the inability to reconcile necessitates
that one becomes perplexed; how can a muqayyad (restricted) or
mufaṣṣal (clear) principle be established by this muṭlaq (general) or
mujmal (ambiguous) evidence? Thus, an objection is made against the
author due to this inability to reconcile or one is compelled to go
through difficulty to search for a taʿwīl. Consequently, there are
examples of this mentioned in the commentaries. However, the reality
is, as the muḥaqqiq (researcher) ʿAllāmah Sindhī v mentions, that the
author’s tarājim are not restricted to the Ḥadīth being an evidence for
it. Rather, some tarājim are such that they are commentaries for the
aḥādīth and explain them. Thus, if in the Ḥadīth mentioned, there is
such a generality or ambiguity that there is the possibility of it being
6 Therefore, the difference between the two chapters has been highlighted in
different ways. In Kitābul Faḍāʾil, only waḥī matlū is meant. Waḥī ghayr matlū
is not meant. Additionally, the conditions surrounding the one to whom waḥī
was revealed is not discussed [in Kitābul Faḍāʾil]. For this reason, “n ‫الى رسول‬
‫ ”هللا‬is not included in this chapter title. Fazl
268
misunderstood, the author in light of other aḥādīth and other

evidences, removes this generality in the tarjumah and the correct
meaning of the Ḥadīth becomes apparent. Alternatively, it can also be
said that if the evidences appear to be contradictory, the author adds a
clause in the tarjumah due to the need to reconcile them. For example,
in ‫( ابواب الحيض‬The Chapters on Menstruation), he mentions a sub-
chapter titled: ‫( باب الصفرة والكدرة في غير ايام الحيض‬The
Chapter on yellow and muddy coloured blood in other than the days of
Ḥayḍ). In this chapter, he mentions the following Ḥadīth of Umme
ʿAṭiyyah d: ‫( َل نعد الكدرة والصفرة شيئا‬We do not count yellow or muddy
coloured blood as anything). The restriction of ‫ في غير ايام الحيض‬which
was mentioned in the tarjumah was not mentioned in the Ḥadīth.
However, the author adds this restriction due to other aḥādīth [which
are inclusive of this restriction] and evidences by which the ṣaḥīḥ
(correct) and true meaning of the Ḥadīth becomes clear.7 Alternatively,
it can also be said that there is a clear contradiction between this
Ḥadīth of Umme ʿAṭiyyahdand the narration of Ṣiddiqahdwhich states:
‫( وَل تعجلن حتي ترين القصة البيضاء‬Do not hasten until you see pure white).
The two are reconciled by the restriction of the author (in the
tarjumah).
‫دره‬
ِّ ‫دره ثم هلل‬
ُّ ‫فلله‬
His success is from Allāh. How excellent and capable he is!
(4) Sometimes, there is one meaning for the chapter title which is
apparent and another hidden meaning. In such a case, most of the
Ḥazrat-e-Naaẓirīn (respected readers) fixes the apparent meaning,
whereas the author v intended the second meaning. Due to this, it
becomes difficult to find the connection between the Ḥadīth and the
tarjumah, the result of which would be the same as mentioned above.
Many suspect that the author did not connect [the Ḥadīth to the
7 This restriction is mentioned in Sunan Abū Dāwūd (‫ بعد الطهر شيئا‬1/43).
269
chapter] while some others would exert lots of effort to find a

connection by bringing far-fetched taʿwīlāt. For example, he mentions
the chapter: ‫‘( باب ما يقو ُل بعد التكبير‬The Chapter Regarding What is
Recited after the Takbīr’) and mentions three aḥādīth under this
chapter. One narration is regarding Ṣalātul Kusūf which has no
connection to the chapter title. Therefore, some commentators
searched for an interpretation, while some of the researchers rejected
these interpretations and did not accept them. However, the root
reason for this confusion is because the apparent meaning of the
chapter title is taken, i.e., the compiler intended specifying a duʿāʾ.
However, after pondering on the Ḥadīth of the chapter it becomes clear
that the compiler intended to highlight that there is leniency regarding
[reciting] the duʿāʾ, i.e., one has the choice regarding reciting it or not
and also regarding whether one reads it continuously or separately.
Additionally, one may read whichever duʿāʾ one wishes to. Now, in this
manner, all three aḥādīth are connected to the chapter title. Similarly,
it was mentioned in the second principle that the chapter regarding the
virtue of knowledge is mentioned twice. There are two meanings
regarding the virtue of ʿilm (knowledge): the apparent and the hidden.
The author v placed the first chapter in accordance with the first
meaning and the second chapter in accordance with the second
meaning. However, the one who takes the apparent meaning in both
instances, would definitely raise the objection against the author that
the chapter title is repeated which in reality is an objection against his
own intellect and understanding, and not on the author.
(5) Sometimes, according to the author, the meaning of the tarjumah is

precisely that which is apparent. However, there is some difficulty and
intricacy in reconciling the Ḥadīth with the tarjumah which we are
unaware of. Due to this, we make objections against the author or the
opportunity to make unacceptable interpretations arise. For example,
by establishing the chapter: ‫( باب ما يُذكر فى الفخذ‬The Chapter Regarding
That which is mentioned About the Thighs), he mentions the evidence
regarding the thighs being part of the ʿawrah and the evidence
270
regarding the thighs not being part of the ʿawrah. He also mentions the
following narration of Zayd ibn Thābit z as evidence that the thighs are
not part of the ʿawrah: ‫( وفخذه على فخذى‬And his thigh was on my thigh).
However, the manner in which this establishes the objective of the
tarjumah is not clear. Those scholars who understand the primary
discussion, clarify the way it can be reconciled without any difficulty.8
Some have only undertaken formalities. This will become clear when
this is discussed in its relevant chapter inshāʾAllāh.
(6) In some instances, the author v mentions a Ḥadīth which is not

connected to the tarjumah. However, in another chapter, he mentions
such a Ḥadīth which has a word which is clearly connected to the
previous tarjumah. A person who is unaware of this is compelled to go
through unnecessary difficulty [to find a connection].
In the beginning of the book, the author v mentions Sayyidunā Ibn
ʿAbbās’hnarration: ‫( ِبتُّ فى بيت خالتى ميمونة الخ‬I spent the night in my
maternal aunt, Maymūnah’s house…) under the chapter,
‫( باب السمر فى العلم‬The Chapter Regarding Late Night Conversations
Pertaining to Knowledge) In this narration, there is no mention of
samar (late night conversation). The commentators were compelled to
come up with various interpretations. However, they are all far-
fetched. Muḥaqqiq (The researcher) Ibn Ḥajar v, after pondering and
researching, found a Ḥadīth in a Kitābut Tafsīr which clearly has the
following wording:‫ فتحد ِّثَ رسو ُل هللا مع أهلِه ساعةً ث ِّم رقَد‬.
‫والحمد هلل وجزاه خيرا‬
All praise is for Allāhl. May Allāhl reward him.
8 The author v placed this to be in the situation where there was no barrier
[between the two thighs] and in this way, he uses it as evidence that the thigh
is not part of the ʿawrah.
271
Sometimes, the Ḥadīth whose wording coincides with the wording of

the tarjumah is not according to the compiler’s conditions even though
it may be ṣaḥīḥ (authentic) and reliable. For this reason, the author did
not mention this narration in his entire book. Only a person who
researches and studies the books of Ḥadīth and tries to avoid the
method of interpretation which appears to be obvious, easy and
concise will become aware of this. From all the points which we have
mentioned until now, and also from many others, it becomes clear and
obvious in many places that this is the objective of the ʿAmīrul
Muʾminīn in Ḥadīth. I have made this conclusion after working hard
year after year in its compilation and research. Many other scholars
have also paid full attention in order to understand it and solve it
according to their abilities. For these reasons, the scholars said that
Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī is most beneficial for the khawāṣ (specialists). Despite
the length and difficulties, the amount of attention the akābir ʿulamāʾ
paid in the service of this blessed book is unparalleled. ‫فجزاه هللا واي ِّاهم عنِّا‬
‫أحسن الجزاء‬
(7) In many instances, coupled with the tarjumatul bāb, the author v
quotes the narrations and statements of the Ṣaḥābah g and the
opinions of the tābiʿīn before mentioning the Ḥadīth. Thus, there are
two cases regarding this:
Their narrations and statements are used as evidence to support the

tarjumah and this is apparent.
Secondly, the narrations and statements are not evidence, but if there
is a connection even in the smallest of ways, it is mentioned to
strengthen the point. ‫الشيء بالشيء ي ُذكر‬.Most of the scholars only consider
them to be evidence for the tarjumah and thus undergo formalities or
they are compelled to raise objections against the author. ‫صرح به العالمة‬ِّ
‫( السندهى وغيره‬ʿAllāmah Sindhī and others have clarified this.)
(8) In some instances, the author only mentions the word ‘bāb’ and
thereafter mentions a musnad Ḥadīth. He does not mention any
272
chapter title. The commentators mention a few possibilities regarding

this which are known to the naẓirīn (readers). However, after
pondering and researching, the preferred opinion is that the tarjumah
was not omitted mistakenly nor forgetfully. Neither was it omitted
with the intention to establish an appropriate tarjumah at a later time.
Rather, he intentionally omitted the tarjumah and this is precisely his
objective. There are two reasons for this omission:
Firstly, this chapter is joined to the previous chapter, and it has some
form of connection to the previous chapter. The scholars regard this as
a faṣl to the previous chapter. The muḥaddithīn call it ‘bāb minhu’ in
their compilations. However, it must be taken into consideration that
according to the expansive foresight of the author, the scope of the
connection is also extensive.
Secondly, in some instances, the author intends to sharpen the mind

and develop a person’s insight. The objective of this is so that the
experts in this field can also derive rulings from this Ḥadīth. This
matter is self-evident that any type of deriving is not enough. Rather, it
is necessary to consider two points:
Firstly, it should be other than the rulings which the author derived
from this Ḥadīth. Secondly, such a tarjumah is derived which is in
cohesion with the chapters under which this chapter without a
tarjumah is mentioned. This matter is befitting to both the author’s
status and style. Thus, whenever we see a chapter without a
tarjumah, we should first check if there is any connection with the
previous chapter or not. If there is, then so be it; the previous tarjumah
will be sufficient. If it is not connected, then it is necessary to think
about formulating a new tarjumah by considering the aforementioned
two restrictions.
Due to mere far-fetched possibilities, this matter is befitting and
beneficial for various reasons. Despite the author mentioning many
chapters without a tarjumah, all of them are restricted to the afore
mentioned two cases. However, in certain instances, it is necessary to
273
truly ponder upon it. If, per chance, one or two chapters are found in
the entire book which cannot be placed in any of the two cases, then
the dictates of the mind and intellect demands that we place it upon
our deficient understanding and intellect. The one who denies this to
the extent that he places it upon someone’s error or mistake and
makes his heart happy and content in two or four places of the book
benefits the author as this protects him from the effects of the evil eye.
In summary, after exempting instances of need, such chapters are

placed in those two scenarios even though there will be some sort of
difficulty, because the matter is known and accepted that the author, in
many places does not hesitate in establishing his objective even if it is
through a distant similarity. Some chapters are such that there are
both possibilities, i.e., it is connected to the previous chapter and
establishing a new chapter title is also befitting (without any formality
or difficulty). Alternatively, many new chapter titles can be applied in
this context. Thus, by pondering upon such a case, the most preferred
opinion becomes known that the knowledgeable author omitted the
title due to the numerous benefits and due to the fear of restricting the
benefits he did not fix nor establish a title. Sometimes, there is some
sort of misunderstanding or objection in the previous chapter(s). Thus,
in order to remove this misunderstanding or objection, the author
brings this chapter without a title and mentions such a Ḥadīth which
clarifies the confusion. Sometimes, due to some fear or caution he does
not consider it befitting to explicitly mention the title.
(9) In many places, only the tarjumah is mentioned along with the
chapter, however, the musnad Ḥadīth is not mentioned. We call these
tarājim mujarradah. The commentators and researchers also mention
a few possibilities regarding this. Where the tarjumah mujarradah is
mentioned, there are these same possibilities. However, in our opinion
after pondering over it a more accurate explanation can be found. For
this reason, it is said that the tarājim mujarradah are of two types:
274
Although there is no mention of a musnad Ḥadīth under the title,

however, an āyah, Ḥadīth or the statement of someone is mentioned
under the tarjumah. We call this ‘tarājim mujarradah ghayr maḥḍah’
and many examples of this type is found in the book.
After establishing the title, nothing else is mentioned. That is, just as no
musnad Ḥadīth is mentioned under the title, similarly, no āyah, Ḥadīth
nor āthār was included. Nothing else was mentioned other than the
claim. We consider it appropriate to name this type, ‘tarājim
mujarradah maḥḍah’. There are very few examples for this. In the
second type i.e., ‘tarājim mujarradadah maḥḍah’, there are a few
chapters where the author v uses a verse as the chapter title. Now, the
tarjumah mujarradah would be of three types:
Firstly, tarājim mujarradah ghayr maḥḍah.
Secondly, tarājim mujarradah maḥḍah. Tarājim maḥḍah ṣūrīyah is a

suitable name for those in which the āyah is used as the tarjumah.
Thirdly, tarājim mujarradah maḥḍah. The one in which the author uses
his statement. Thus, this type of tarjumah can be named tarājim
maḥḍah ḥaqīqīyah.
After mentioning these details, it is clear that in the first type, i.e.,
tarājim mujarradah ghayr maḥḍah, coupled with the tarjumah, a verse
or Ḥadīth or a musand statement which is worthy of being used as an
evidence is mentioned which is sufficient to prove the objective. Thus,
it is clear that in order to prove the author’s objective, no probability
remains which would necessitate that another evidence be brought
forth.
By the author sufficing on the evidences mentioned, it does not cause

any type of confusion. Similarly in type two, i.e., tarājim maḥḍah
ṣūrīyah, although no evidence is mentioned along with the tarjumah,
however, the tarjumah itself is the Qurʾānic verse which the is
strongest evidence over all the other evidences. Thus, it is clear that
275
there is no need for an evidence to prove itself. It appears to be merely

a tarjumah but in reality, it is ‫ دعوى دليلها نفسها‬it is a claim for which its
evidence is itself. For this reason, the condition of this type of tarājim
should be (to a higher degree) precisely that which was mentioned for
the first type. In these two types, why did the author not bring a
musnad mustamirah Ḥadīth and only sufficed on an āyah etc.? The
reason for this can be either one of the following:
The author did not find a Ḥadīth according to his conditions.
There is such a Ḥadīth, however, it is mentioned in another place.

Therefore, it is not repeated here.
It is to sharpen the mind and intellect.
In the third type, i.e., tarājim maḥdah ḥaqīqiyah, no evidence is

mentioned along with it nor can it be considered a proof or evidence
itself. Therefore, it appears to be a claim without an evidence.
Regarding this type, even after thorough research, very few of this type
of tarjumah is found. They do not even reach ten. Based on our
deficiency in searching and differences in the nuskhahs, there could be
more than this number and it is also possible that they can be less in
number. So, of these very few tarājim, most of them are such that a
clear musnad Ḥadīth is mentioned in a previous or upcoming chapter.
In total, there are two or three chapters that although a Ḥadīth which
connects to the title is not found in the chapters close to it, however, a
Ḥadīth can be found which connects to the title in chapters further
away from it. After considering these points, the preferred opinion
seems to be that the author also sufficed on the tarjumah maḥḍah
intentionally in these cases. Additionally, in order to refrain from
repetition or to sharpen the intellects or due to the other two reasons
mentioned previously, he considers those aḥādīth which are
mentioned in a chapter that is attached to this one or a further chapter
to be sufficient to prove the claim of the tarjumah.
.‫صواب و ِب ُمرا ِد العباد‬

ِّ ‫ وهللا أعلم بال‬،‫هذا ما عندنا من التفصيل‬
276
(10) In some instances, the author v establishes and proves one

objective in repetitive tarājim and chapters. There are different forms
of this. For example, they are concise in one chapter and are explained
in another chapter. Sometimes, the point of the tarjumah is proven in
the first chapter with evidence other than the musnad Ḥadīth. In the
second chapter, it is proven with a musnad Ḥadīth. Sometimes, there is
more than one tarjumah but their objective is the same. Sometimes, the
Ḥadīth which is brought to prove the tarjumah is deficient in proving
the objective. After this, the Ḥadīth which is brought in the second
chapter rectifies the defects of the former. Sometimes, a musnad
Ḥadīth is mentioned to prove a tarjumah and this Ḥadīth also
establishes another chapter in its appropriate place. After this, when
the second tarjumah is established, this Ḥadīth is not mentioned again.
The first Ḥadīth is sufficient. Those who do not ponder over it, say that
Imām Bukhārī v could not bring the ḥadīth for some reason although
Imām Bukhārī v has already mentioned it previously. ‫كما فصلنا فى تراجم‬
‫( المجردة‬As we have outlined in the discussion regarding the tarājim
mujarradah.) Sometimes a few matters are mentioned in the tarjumah
but only some are mentioned in the Ḥadīth. In such a case, it is
compensated by the āthār and statements mentioned below the
tarjumah, and sometimes it is proven by qiyās (analogy). In many cases
in the tarjumah, such an unknown, vague and ambiguous word is
mentioned that even the commentators differ regarding specifying and
explaining its meaning. In such a case, the possibility which is most
befitting in the context and that which does not cast any doubts
regarding the author should be preferred. If both possibilities are
equal, then we will understand that the author intends both meanings
and that is why he chose such a word.
(11) In many instances, there are such tarājim for which there is no
need to explain. There are a few reasons for this. Firstly, it indicates
towards the refutation of someone’s statement. For example, Shāh
277
Walīullāh v9 mentions that the author indicates in many instances

towards the refutation of the statements of Muṣannaf Ibn Abī Shaybah
and Muṣannaf ʿAbdur Razzāq which becomes known by researching
their books.
Secondly, there is the possibility of doubt in certain instances or there

is a doubt regarding the contradiction of a narration. The author does
this to remove this (doubt).
Thirdly, although there is no need to mention the jawāz and ibāḥah

(permissibility), there is however, a need to establish a sunnah or
istiḥbāb which is suspended on the statements and actions of the
legislator. Also, see how beneficial and important it is to make those
rulings which are derived and based upon logic manṣūṣ.
(12) Sometimes, the author mentions a tarjumah which fulfils his

objective. However, in the narration, its evidence is not precisely
found. Alternatively, there are few evidences or there is a doubt in
them. Therefore, after the tarjumah, he mentions another befitting
tarjumah for which its exact evidences are explicitly mentioned. He
mentions narrations according to the second tarjumah and the
objective of this narration is to establish the first tarjumah which is the
primary objective. The second tarjumah is mentioned to create ease
with regards to the evidences.
(13) Sometimes, two matters are mentioned in the chapter title.

However, only one portion is mentioned in the Ḥadīth. On seeing this,
such a thought may occur that one part of it has been left without being
proven, whereas the objective of the author was only the first part and
the other part is accepted and apparent. It is only mentioned by the
way or as a precaution. Therefore, there was no need to mention a
Ḥadīth which was connected to it.
9Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar v also mentions this in various places. He also mentions the
names of those who made the statements. (Fazl)
278
(14) Sometimes, after mentioning the tarjumah and a Ḥadīth connected

to it, another such narration is mentioned in which its connection to
the chapter title is not apparent. The reason for this is that there is
some discussion in the first Ḥadīth which is worthy of mentioning and
the second Ḥadīth is brought in order to complete it. It is not brought
to establish nor prove the chapter title. Rather, sometimes due to some
necessity, the second Ḥadīth which contradicts the tarjumah is
mentioned.
(15) In many instances, the ruling of the chapter title is not mentioned.
The title is mentioned on its own in its generality. Most of the time it is
understood without any difficulty. Sometimes a dispute arises among
the ʿulamāʾ. Sometimes, due to this, the situation arises where the
author is accused of mentioning a Ḥadīth which does not coincide with
the tarjumah. In such situations it is befitting that after pondering over
the narrations, one establishes either the generality or the restrictions
of the chapter title, whichever is best. Additionally, the connection of
the Ḥadīth must also be considered when specifying the restriction.
The booklet of Shaykhul Hind v, which is published by the title “Al

Abwāb wat Tarājim”, compiled by Ḥazrat Shaykhul Hind Mawlānā
Maḥmūdul Ḥasan ‫ قدس سره‬and published by Shaykhul Islām Mawlānā
Ḥusayn Aḥmad Muhājir Madnī, the resident of Kolkata, India, which is
printed by Maktabatul Muḍāribah Deoband, also came into my
possession. A comparison was also made with this. After this, Shaykhul
Hind v discussed each chapter from the beginning until
‫باب من أجاب السائل بأكثر مما سأله‬. Another booklet was also found, which
included a discussion on a few chapters after this as well. The entire
book is priceless.
279
280
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS COMMENTARIES AND MARGINALIA OF ṢAḤĪḤ BUKHĀRĪ
An Introduction and Enlightenment
on the
Commentaries and Marginalia of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī
The author of “Kashfuẓ Ẓunūn” mentioned seventy-nine (79) shurūḥ

(commentaries), hawāshī (marginalia) and mukhtaṣarāt (abridged
versions) of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī and Shaykh Muḥammad Zakariyyā v
mentioned one hundred and thirty-two (132) commentaries, footnotes
and amālī (dictations) in the introduction of “Lāmīʿ ud Darārī”.
Shaykh Muḥammad ʿAṣām ʿArrār Al-Ḥusaynī Ad-Dimashqī v

mentioned three hundred and seventy-five (375) books which have
been written regarding Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī in his book “Itḥāful Qārī bi
Mʿarifatil Juhūd wa Aʿmālil ʿUlamāʾ ʿalā Ṣāḥīḥ Bukhārī”.
I got this book from Damascus. It was written on 25/12/1405 A.H.
281
The Most Famous Commentaries of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī
1. Fatḥul Bārī bi sharḥ Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī (‫)فتح البارى بشرح صحيح البخاري‬
Author: Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar Al-Asqalānī v
Birth: 773 A.H
Death: 852 A.H 1
The compilation of this commentary began in 817 A.H and it was

completed in the beginning of Rajab 842 A.H. In this manner, this work
was completed in twenty-five (25) years. Before this, the introduction,
i.e., “Hadyus Sārī” was completed in 813 A.H. Even earlier than this, in
804 A.H, “Taghlīq ut Taʿlīq” was completed, in which the takhrīj of the
taʿlīqāt of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī was done. (Fatḥul Bārī 13/546 and Muqaddamah of
Taghlīqut Taʿlīq pg. 215)
In his book “Intiqāḍul Iʿtirāḍ”2, Ḥāfiẓ v wrote: “I commenced the

(writing of the) sharḥ of Bukhārī in 813 A.H. Before this I had collected
the muʿallaqah aḥādīth in a separate book called “Taghlīqut Taʿlīq”,
which was completed in 804 A.H. Thereafter, an introduction was also
prepared, which comprised of all the objectives of the sharḥ other than
istinbāṭ. This was completed in 813 A.H. In this same year, I started
working on [compiling] the commentary. I wrote one part which was
very detailed and explanatory. Then I feared that [by writing] in such a
detailed manner, the commentary may not be completed. Therefore, I
1This is that ingenious personality who came to this world. Read regarding
him and the manner in which Ḥāfiẓ v wrote this sharḥ. [Extracted from Ifādātush
Shaykh]
2 Ḥāfiẓ v wrote this book as a reply to the objections of ʿAllāmah ʿAynīv.

282
started writing a moderate sized commentary which was titled “Fatḥul

Bārī bi sharḥil Bukhārī”. After approximately five years, a quarter of
this commentary was prepared. Thereafter, I met a group of skilled and
efficient students who assisted me in compiling this sharḥ…” 3
(Muqaddamah Lāmiʿ pg. 128)
From this statement of Ḥāfiẓ v, it becomes known that the work on this
commentary commenced in 813 A.H. And Allāh l knows best!
“Intiqāḍul Iʿtirāḍ” was written as an answer to the objections of ʿAynī

v. Likewise, another book “Al Istinṣār ʿalat Ṭāʿinil Maʿthār” was also
written to expose the errors of ʿAynī v.4
“Fatḥul Bārī” comprises of thirteen (13) volumes and the introduction,

“Hadyus Sārī” is one large volume. This commentary of Ḥāfiẓ v is
known to be the best of sharḥs and it is the most famous of them.
When this commentary was completed on Monday 2nd Shaʿbān, Ḥāfiẓ v

hosted a magnificent feast in which almost all the prominent people
were present. Five hundred (500) dinārs were spent on this feast. The
kings of foreign lands arranged for [many copies of] this sharḥ to be
written, and it was sold for three hundred (300) dinārs, thus becoming
famous in the entire world.5 (Muqaddamah Lāmiʿ pg. 128)
2. ʿUmdatul Qārī sharḥ Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī (‫)عمدة القارى شرح صحيح البخاري‬
3 He completed this work with his students. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
4 The meaning of ‘maʿthār’ is the one who makes a lot of errors. [Extracted from
Ifādātush Shaykh]
5 They still recognised and accepted [this sharḥ] despite their differences in
madhāhib. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
283
Author: ʿAllāmah Badrud Dīn Abī Muḥammad Maḥmūd ibn Aḥmad Al-
ʿAynī v (death: 855 A.H)6
ʿAllāmah ʿAynī v was born on the 17th of Ramaḍān 762 A.H in ʿAyn Tāb
which is three manzils from Ḥalab thus he was eleven years older than
Ibn Ḥajar v and he also died three years after Ḥāfiẓ v in Dhul Ḥijjah
855 A.H.
“ʿUmdatul Qārī” comprises of twenty-five (25 volumes) which has been

published in Egypt in twelve (12) volumes. However, ʿAllāmah ʿAynī v
divided it in to twenty-one (21) volumes. In the end of the sharḥ7 ʿAynī
v wrote: “I completed the writing of the 21st volume of this work in the
end of the first third of Saturday night, 5th Jumād-al-ʾŪlā 847 A.H and
began the compilation of this work in the end of Rajab 820 A.H.” (In
this way, this work was completed in twenty-seven (27) years.)
He thereafter mentioned the details [regarding its compilation]. The

first volume was completed on 6th Dhūl Ḥijjah 820 A.H, the second
volume on 7th Jumād-al-ʾUkhrā 821 A.H, the third volume on 8th Jumād-
al-ʾŪlā 833 A.H. (It is possible that 838 A.H is more correct. (Muqaddmah
Lāmiʿ pg. 129)) I then stopped writing for half a year. The gap between
these two volumes is sixteen (16) years8. The fourth volume was
6ʿAllāmah ʿAynī v was a Ḥanafī. He and Ḥāfiẓ v were from the same era. Both
resided in Cairo, Egypt. There were a lot of heated arguments and discussions
between the two. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
7 It was his habit to add the year etc. in the end of his compilation. [Extracted from
Ifādātush Shaykh]
8It would be sixteen (16) years in the case if it is accepted that he completed
the third volume in 838 A.H. it is due to this that Shaykh Muḥammad
Zakariyyā v said that changes have been made here.
During this gap, ʿAynī v went to Rome on the request of the King Muʾayid and
he became the Qaḍī ul Qaḍāh (chief judge) in 829 A.H. During this time, he
translated his Arabic history book into Turkish and read it out to the King,
284
completed on the 9th Rabīʿul Awwal 839 A.H. Thereafter, the writing
and compiling continued in a steady and consistent manner until the
book was completed in 847 A.H.
ʿAynī v started writing his commentary shortly after Ḥāfiẓ v and

completed it five years after Ḥāfiẓ v. ʿAynī’s sharḥ was completed five
years before the death of Ḥāfiẓ v. There was rivalry between these two.
They refuted one another. Both of their books were written around the
same time. Some students would regularly come by both of them9.
Burhān ibn Khiḍr, a student of Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar v, showed ʿAynī v a
portion of Ḥāfiẓ’s v sharḥ. For this reason in some places, ʿAynī v
quotes and refutes Ḥāfiẓ’s v statement by referring to him with the
words ‘‫’بعضهم بعضهم‬.
When ʿAynī’s v commentary was published, Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar v wrote

“Intiqāḍul Iʿtirāḍ” to refute ʿAynī v. He wrote the objections leaving
blank spaces to write the answers. However, he never had the
opportunity to do so. He passed away. From this, it is known that the
ʿAynī’s v objections were strong. Ḥāfiẓ v gave satisfactory answers to
some of them. In some other places, ʿAynī’s v objections are completely
weak. (Badrud Dīn ʿAynī wa Athrihī by Shaykh Ṣāliḥ Maʿtūq)
Ḥāfiẓ v wrote that in 822 A.H., a student showed me a booklet written

by the muḥtasib (superintendent)10 of Cairo, Egypt in which there was
Ashraf Barsbāʿi. ʿAynī v resigned from the position of judge in 842 A.H. and
Saʿdud Dīn Damīrī Ḥanafī became the judge.
9This student would bring information from both teachers and show it to the
other teacher. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
10ʿAllāmah ʿAynī v was the superintendent of Cairo, Egypt. The job of the
superintendent is to guard the city and make sure that no one does anything
wrong. This is one branch of amr bil maʿrūf and nahī ʿanil munkar (enjoining
good and forbidding evil). The one who goes around doing this is called a
285
more than eighty (80) errors. I wrote one volume regarding it, which
was called “Al Istinṣār ʿalāt Ṭāʿinil Maʿthār”. In this volume, there was a
response to the fatwā regarding the introduction of ʿAynī’s v sharḥ.
Kawtharī v wrote that after ʿAynī’s v sharḥ was published, Ibn Ḥajar v
made a few corrections in his book. (Muqaddamah Lāmiʿ pg. 130, 139,
Muqaddamah ʿUmdatul Qārī by Kawtharī pg. 9 and Muqaddamah Fayḍul Bārī pg. 38)
Some people accuse ʿAynī v of benefitting from Ibn Ḥajar’s v sharḥ

without referencing him. The proof [which supports this accusation] is
that in some places, the text is exactly the same as the text mentioned
in “Fatḥul Bārī”. Kawtharī v answered this by saying that the sources
they both utilized were the same. Thus, the text would also be the
same. (Muqaddamah ʿUmdah pg. 9 and ʿAllāmah Badrud Dīn aur ʿIlme Ḥadīth main
un ki naqshi Dawām pg. 174)
Nevertheless, “Fatḥul Bārī” was published first and ʿAynī v obtained a

copy of it. Thus, it is obvious the ʿAynī v benefitted from it and on
seeing the references of the sources used, he referred to the original
sources. This is why there is similarity in the texts. (ʿAllāmah Badrud Dīn
aur ʿIlme Ḥadīth main un ki naqshi Dawām pg. 174)
A Comparison Between the Two
The question remains as to which of the two is superior and better?

The truth is that there are some specialties in ʿUmdah which are not in
Fatḥ and other specialties in Fatḥ which are not in ʿUmdah.
It is mentioned in the discourses of ʿAllāmah Kashmīrī v that Ḥāfiẓ’s v

sharḥ is better in terms of displaying the art of Ḥadīth and also from
the angle that the language and layout is good. Specifying the
interpretation and meaning of the Ḥadīth and establishing the
muḥtasib-a superintendent. He also used to do ghasht. [Extracted from Ifādātush

Shaykh]
286
reliability of the narrations (i.e., searching for supporting chains) has

been done in an excellent manner.
ʿAynī’s v sharḥ is better from the angle that the explanation and
commentary of the words are mentioned in a nice and organised
manner and the statements of the pious predecessors are mentioned
frequently. However, the information is scattered. The layout is not as
good as Ḥāfiẓ’s v layout. These details continue until the fourth volume.
In summary, Ḥāfiẓ’s v sharḥ is given precedence. (Muqaddamah Fayḍul Bārī
pg. 38)11
Shaykh Ṣāliḥ Maʿtūq v mentioned the following specialties of ʿUmdah:
1. The total number of pages in “ʿUmdatul Qārī” is seven thousand six

hundred and thirty-one (7631). The total number of pages in “Fatḥul
Bārī”, excluding the introduction, is seven thousand five hundred and
fifteen (7515). The pages in ʿUmdah are also larger in size. Therefore,
ʿUmdah is approximately a quarter (¼) larger than Fatḥ.
2. ʿAynī v separates each Ḥadīth from the other and then writes the
commentary of each Ḥadīth individually. Ḥāfiẓ v writes all the
aḥādīth of the chapter and then mentions the commentary. He does
not separate the aḥādīth. (In fact, Ḥāfiẓ v did not even copy the
aḥādīth in his sharḥ. Those after him added them. (See Fatḥ pg. 4) 12
11Look how ʿAllāmah Kashmīrī v is not supporting and being biased towards
his madh-hab. ʿAynī v is a Ḥanafī. Therefore, we always try to somehow prove
that his sharḥ is the best. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
12ʿAllāmah ʿAynī v has narrated the entire text of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī in his ʿUmdah.
For this reason, “ʿUmdatul Qārī” appears to be very lengthy, because the entire
text of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī is also mentioned. The text of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī is not in
“Fatḥul Bārī”. Ḥāfiẓ v wrote the commentary by simply writing “qawluhu”,
qawluhū”. The “Fatḥul Bārī” we have today has the entire text mentioned in it.
This was not in the Fatḥ of Ḥāfiẓ v. This is why ʿAynī’sv (sharḥ) appears to be
very lengthy. This is mentioned on page 4 of “Fatḥul Bārī”. Perhaps Shaykh
Ṣāliḥ Maʿtūq v was unaware of this. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
287
3. He discusses the takhrīj of the aḥādīth in detail and he also mentions

all those, other than Imām Bukhārī v who did the takhrīj of the
Ḥadīth.
He has also mentioned other specialties. (The translation of Badruddīn
ʿAynī wa athrihi fi ʿilmil Ḥadīth pg. 162)
The following has been mentioned regarding the specialities of “Fatḥul

Bārī”:
1. “Muqaddamah Hadyus Sārī” holds great significance. (In ʿUmdah,

ʿAynī v only mentions ten benefits in ten pages.)13
2. In the end of each chapter, Ibn Ḥajar v mentions the number of
aḥādīth in details. He mentions the marfūʿ, mawqūf, mukarrar and
muʿallaq narrations separately. He also mentions those which Imām
Muslim v also mentioned.
3. “Fatḥul Bārī” has detailed commentary right to the end of the book.
Whereas, in the beginning of ʿAynī’s v (sharḥ), there is detailed
commentary while in the end it is significantly brief. (Ibid pg.70)
ʿAllāmah Kawtharī v gave preference to ʿUmdah over Fatḥ14 and he

mentions those details which ʿAynī v mentioned in his sharḥ. He writes
that the difference between the two is like the difference between the
full moon and shooting star.15 (Muqaddamah ʿUmdah pg. 9) The full moon
13 Whereas Muqaddamah Hadyus Ṣārī is very long and very detailed. [Extracted
14 This is because he was biased with regards to his own madh-hab. [Extracted
15 ʿAynī’s v title is ‘Badr-ud-Dīn’. Ḥāfiẓ’s v title is Shihābud-Dīn. Badr is known

as the full moon whereas the shooting star only shines for a little while before
its shine disappears. ʿAllāmah Kawtharī v played on the literal wording. He
also opposes Ibn Taymiyyah v and writes very harshly against him. When we
asked our teacher, ʿAllāmah ʿAẓmīv, he replied: ʿAllāmah Kawtharī v did not
understand Ibn Taymiyyah’sv condition. He was too harsh, he has not done
right. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
288
shines with complete brightness whereas shooting stars are not always
radiant. (Muqaddamah Lāmiʿ pg. 120)
However, this explanation is only found in the first four volumes, not in
the full book. (Tarjumah Badruddīn ʿAynī pg. 176)
Someone said to Ḥāfiẓ v: ʿAynī’s v sharḥ is better than your sharḥ with
regards to rhetoric etc. He immediately said that he (ʿAynī) took it from
Ruknud Dīn’s (death: 783 AH) sharḥ. I knew of it, however, I did not
quote from it because it is incomplete. It is only a small portion. Due to
this, ʿAynī v did not discuss this topic further on. (Muqaddamah Lāmiʿ pg.
130)16
In both sharḥs, they are unnecessarily defending their madh-habs.
Ibn Khaldūn mentions from his mashāyikh that Imām Bukhārī’s sharḥ
is a debt on the ummah. Sakhāwī v is of the opinion that Ibn Ḥajar v
had paid it off. In “Kashfuẓ Ẓunūn”, on page 641 Ḥājī Khalīfah v said
that Ibn Ḥajar v and ʿAynī v has repaid this debt. Kawtharī v says that
according to the author, ʿAynī v had a bigger portion of it [i.e., in
repaying the debt]. (Muqaddamah ʿUmdah pg. 9)
Nevertheless, the later commentators were inspired by these two

sharḥs and they gathered the research and information from these two
commentaries. May Allāh l accept the service of these two and allow
us to benefit from them! Āmīn.
3. Irshād us Sārī Ilā sharḥ Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī ( ‫ارشاد الساري الى شرح صحيح‬
‫)البخاري‬
Author: Shaykh Shihābuddīn Aḥmad ibn Muḥammad Al Khaṭīb Al

Qasṭalānī Al-Miṣrī Ash Shāfiʿīv
16This is someone else’s wealth which you are adding into your book. When
that is completed, this will also be completed. See how Ḥāfiẓ was immediately
taken to task. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
289
Birth: Dhūl Qaʿdah 851 A.H.
Death: Muḥarram 923 A.H.
It is as if this sharḥ is a summary of “Fatḥul Bārī” and “ʿUmdatul Qārī”.

He also benefitted from the commentaries of Barmāwī, Damāmīnī,
Nawawī and others. This sharḥ is also famous by the title, Qasṭalānī. It
can be read both ways: Qasṭalānī and Qasṭallānī, with a tashdīd on or
takhfīf of the lām.
He completed this compilation on 17th Rabīʿuth Thānī 916 A.H. and

completed Kitābul Aḥkām on 15th Muḥarram 916 A.H., i.e., from Kitābul
Aḥkām until the end was written in two months and two days.
His most famous book is “Mawāhib Ladūniyyah”. He completed it in

998 A.H. Zarqānī v wrote a sharḥ on it which is a very famous book of
sīrah.
He is ascribed to Qasṭalīnah, which is located somewhere in Africa. He

was born in Miṣr (Egypt) and he also died there. He is buried next to
ʿAynī v.
He was an expert in qirāʾah. He also wrote a sharḥ on Shāṭibiyah,

Laṭāʾiful Ishārāt fil Qirāʾātil Arbaʿ Asharah and also on Qasīdah Burdah.
He was the student of Sakhāwī v and Shaykhul Islām Zakariyyā Al

Anṣārī v.
Suyūṭī v was displeased with him because in Mawāhib he narrated

points from Suyūṭī’s book without referencing his book17. When this
issue was mentioned in the presence of Shaykh Zakariyyā Anṣārīv,
Qasṭalānī v was unable to prove himself innocent.
17One must not plagiarise with regards to knowledge. If any point is taken
from another book, it must be referenced. This plagiarism creates defects.
290
He was a very good lecturer. He performed ḥajj a few times and he also
stayed in Makkah Mukarramah. (Muqaddamah Lāmiʿ pg. 130)
4. Kawākibud Darārī fi sharḥ Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī

(‫)الكواكب الدراري في شرح صحيح البخاري‬
Author: ʿAllāmah Shamsuddīn Muḥammad ibn Yūsuf Al Kirmānī Al

Baghdādī Ash Shāfiʿī v
Birth: 16th Jumād-al-ʾUkhrā 717 A.H.
Death: 16th Muḥarram 786 A.H.
This name was inspired to him. He completed this sharḥ in Makkah

Mukarramah in the year 775 A.H. One day, while he was sleeping in the
maṭāf (area around the Kaʿbah), this name was inspired into his heart.
Ibn Ḥajar v, ʿAynī v and those coming later benefitted from this sharḥ.
This Shaykh was an Imām in Ḥadīth, tafsīr, fiqh, maʿānī and Arabic.
He first studied under his father and then he went to Kirmān where he
stayed twelve years in the service of Qāḍī ʿAḍduddīn ibn Yaḥyā v.
Thereafter, he started travelling and sought knowledge from the
scholars of Egypt, Syria, Hijāz and ʿIrāq. In Egypt, he heard Ḥadīth from
Nāṣiruddīn Bukhārī v. He performed ḥajj and then took up residence in
Baghdād where he stayed for thirty years. He remained completely
isolated from worldly people. The king would come to him and seek his
advice and duʿāʾs. He performed ḥajj towards the end of his life. He
passed away on his return. A grave was prepared for him near Shaykh
Abū Isḥāq Shīrāzī v in Baghdād and he was buried there. ‫رحمه هللا رحمة واسعة‬
Kirmānī’s sharḥ is beneficial but it has some errors in it. This sharḥ was
compiled using the books of Khaṭṭābī Shāfiʿī, Ibn Baṭāl Mālikī and
Mughalṭay Ḥanafī. (Muqaddamah Lāmiʿ pg. 131)
Some Other Commentaries

(Extracted from Muqaddamah Lāmiʿ)
291
5. Sharḥ Imām Nawawī (‫)شرح اإلمام النووي‬
Birth: 631 A.H.
Death: 676 A.H.
Age: 45 years
This sharḥ is older than the aforementioned commentaries. However,

it is only until ‫باب النصح لكل مسلم‬-Bāb An-Nuṣhi Li Kulli Muslim (Chapter
on advice for every Muslim) of Kitābul ʾĪmān. After writing this, Imām
Nawawī v passed away. He also started writing a sharḥ on Sunan Abū
Dawūd, however, this was also not completed. He wrote an
introduction for the sharḥ of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī which is published by the
title “Ḥajatul Qārī”.
Imām Nawawī v never got married. He did a lot of mujāhadah. He only

ate a little after ʿIshāʾ and used to drink a sip of water in breakfast. 18
The sharḥ of Nawawī is published.
(For details see: Muqaddamah sharḥun Nawawī Lil Bukhārī by Doctor ʿAbdullāh ibn
Umar Ad Damījī, pg. 27-84.)
6. Aʿlāmus Sunan (‫)اعالم السنن‬
Author: Khaṭṭābī ibn Abī Sulaymān Aḥmad ibn Muḥammad ibn Ibrāhīm
Al Bustī v
Death: 308 A.H.
It is a concise sharḥ of one volume. Before this, Khaṭṭābī wrote a sharḥ

of Sunan Abū Dawūd by the title “Maʿālimus Sunan”. (It has been
18He lived a life of extreme poverty. He lived with simplicity in Damascus.

After his death, the people’s screams could be heard in Damascus. He was a
person who was greatly accepted. However, before his death, he left
Damascus and returned to his hometown. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
292
published in Makkah Mukarramah by the title “Aʿlāmul Ḥadīth” in four

volumes.)
Imām Muḥammad Tamimī (or Taimī) made additions to it and pointed

out the errors of Khaṭṭābī.
7. Sharḥ Dāwudī (‫)شرح الداودي‬
Author: Abū Jaʿfar Aḥmad ibn Saʿīd or Aḥmad ibn Naṣr Dāwūdī Asadī v
He was from among the Maghribī Mālikī scholars. He was in Tarābilis.

He moved to Talmasān and passed away there in 402 A.H. He wrote a
sharḥ on Muwaṭṭāʾ. The name of the Bukhārī’s sharḥ is “An-Nasīhah”.
Ibn Tīn narrates from it. (This Dawūdī is other than the Dāwūdī in the
chain. He passed away in 467 A.H. and his name was ʿAbdur Raḥmān.)
8. Sharḥ Al-Muhallab (‫)شرح المهلب‬
Author: Al Muhallab Abū Qāsim ibn Asad ibn Abī Safra At-Taymī v
He is from among the senior students of Asīlī. Bukhārī Sharīf became

famous in Andalus, Spain due to him. He wrote an ikhtiṣār
(abridgement) of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī, which was titled: “An-Nasīh fi
Ikhtisaaris Ṣaḥīḥ” and he also wrote footnotes for it.19 He was a Mālikī
and an expert in the fields of Ḥadīth and fiqh. He was the judge of
Mālika and he died in 433 A.H. One of his students, Abū ʿAbdullāh
Muḥammad ibn Khalaf (death: after 480 A.H), compiled an ikhtiṣār
19This is a very beneficial book. In some madāris, this book is taught because
there are many repeated narrations in Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī. In “An-Naṣīḥ”, the
repeated narrations are omitted. By [reading] this book, one becomes aware
of all the aḥādīth in Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
293
(abridged version) of his sharḥ and also added a few beneficial

points.20
ّ ‫)شرح ابن ب‬
9. Sharḥ Ibn Baṭṭāl Al Magribī Al Mālikī (‫طال المغربي المالكي‬
Death: 444 A.H.
He mainly mentions the Mālikī fiqh. Kirmānī benefited from his sharḥ
as was mentioned previously.
10. Sharḥ ibn Tīn (‫)شرح ابن التين‬
Ḥāfiẓ v narrates many points from the sharḥ of Ibn Tīn As-Safāqasī.
His name was ʿAbdul Wāḥid and he passed away before the 9th century.
11. Sharḥ ul Imām (‫)شرح اإلمام‬
Author: Zayn ud Dīn ʿAlī ibn Muḥammad ibn Mansūr ibn Munnīr v
Death: 695 A.H.
He wrote a ten volume sharḥ of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī.
His brother Nāṣirud Dīn Aḥmad ibn Muḥammad ibnil Munnīr wrote a
book on the tarājim of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī titled “Almutawārā ʿAlā Tarājimil
Bukhārī”. He passed away in 683 A.H. (Muqaddamah Lāmiʿ pg. 134)
He discussed four hundred tarājim. Badr ibn Jamāʿah wrote a summary

of it and also added to it. ʿAlī ibn Munīr also went into depth on the
discussion of tarājim in his book. (Hadyus Sārī pg. 14)
20In “Fatḥul Bārī”, Muhallab’s [sharḥ] is quoted a lot. Dāwudī is also quoted a
lot. The muṭālaʿah of “Fatḥul Bārī” will become easy for a person who reviews
these books. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
294
12. Sharḥ ul Imām Quṭbud dīn ʿAbdul Karim ibn ʿAbdun Nūr Al-
Ḥalabī Al-Ḥanafī (‫)شرح اإل مام قطب الدين عبد الكريم بن عبد النور الحلبي الحنفي‬
Death: 735 A.H.
This is a sharḥ of half of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī. It is printed in ten volumes.
13. Sharḥ ul Imām Ḥāfiẓ ʿAlāʾ ud Dīn Mughalṭāy ibn Qalīj Al-Turkī
Al-Misrī Al-Ḥanafī ( ‫شرح اإلمام الحافظ عالء الدين مغلطاي ابن قليج التركي المصري‬
‫)الحنفي‬
Death: 735 A.H.
This is a large sharḥ, titled “At-Talwīḥ”.
This ʿAllāmah Mughalṭāy was a very great muḥaddith.21 He authored

more than one hundred books. He wrote sharḥs on Sunan Ibn Mājah
and Sunan Abū Dāwūd which are incomplete. He also wrote footnotes
on “Tahdhībul Kamāl” of Mizzī v from which Ḥāfiẓ v took benefit from
in “Tahdhībut Tahdhīb”.22
Those after them, especially Ibn Mulaqqin, gained tremendous benefit

from the shurūh of Quṭbud Dīn Ḥalabī and ʿAllāmah Mughalṭay. Jalālud
Dīn Tabānī, (death 793 A.H.) compiled an abridged version of the sharḥ
of Mughalṭay.
14. Sharḥ Taqī ud Dīn Yaḥyā ibn Muḥammad Kirmānī

(‫)شرح تقي الدين يحيى ابن محمد كرماني‬
21He was also a giant expert in grading aḥādīth. One of his sharḥs of Ibn Mājah
will be mentioned in which a specific Ḥadīth is mentioned. If Allāh wills, we
will mention it when discussing the ruling of tark rafaʿ yadayn. [Extracted from
Ifādātush Shaykh]
22He wrote footnotes on Mizzī’s “Tahdhībul Kamāl”. From this, his position in
the field of asmāʾ rijāl can be gauged. “Tahdhībut Tahdhīb” is a summary and
abridged version of this “Tahdhībul Kamāl”. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
295
This is the sharḥ of Kirmānī’s son (mentioned above). Qasṭalānī v saw

this book. It is in eight large volumes.
15. Sharḥ Sirājud Dīn ʿUmar ibn ʿAlī ibnil Mulaqqin Ash Shāfiʿī
(‫)شرح سراج الدين عمر بن على بن الملقن الشافعي‬
Death: 804 A.H.
This comprises of twenty volumes. There is an important introduction

in the beginning. The title of this sharḥ is “Shawāhidut Tawḍīh”. Its
main sources were Mughalṭay and Quṭbud Dīn.23
16. Sharḥ ʿAllāmah al Barmāwī (‫)شرح العالمة البرماوي‬
Death: 813 A.H.
Author: ʿAllāmah Shamsud Dīn Abū ʿAbdullāh Muḥammad ibn ʿAbdud

Dāʾim ibn Mūsā Al Barmāwī Ash Shāfiʿī v
The name of this sharḥ is “Al Lāmiʿus Ṣabīḥ” and it comprises of four
volumes.
17. Sharḥ of Shaykh Burhān ud Dīn Ibrāhīm ibn Muḥammad Al

Ḥalabī (‫) شرح الشيخ برهان الدين ابراهيم بن محمد الحلبي‬
He was famous by the name Sabṭ ibnil ʿAjmī. He passed away in 841
A.H. The title of his sharḥ is “At Talqīḥ Li Fahm Qārī us Ṣaḥīḥ”. This
23 After writing a commentary of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī, he began writing

commentaries on the zawāʿid of Muslim, Abū Dāwūd, Tirmidhī, Nasāʿī and Ibn
Mājah from the first chapter in each book. He wrote a commentary on each
book. He is Ḥāfiẓ’s v teacher. He is also a contemporary of Ḥāfiẓ’s teacher
ʿIrāqī. He is famous by the name Ibn Mulaqqin. We have mentioned him in our
compilation of Nasāʿī because he is also the commentator of the zawāʾid of
Nasāʾī. His father passed away. Thus, he was under the supervision of a man
who was a scholar. This is why he became famous. He did not like to be called
Ibn Mulaqqin. However, he became famous by this name. It is said that he has
written three hundred books. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
296
sharḥ consists of two volumes when written in his handwriting and it

consists of four volumes when written by others. There are beneficial
points in it. He had two hundred teachers of Ḥadīth. He read Ṣaḥīḥ
Bukhārī more than sixty times and Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim twenty times. He also
wrote footnotes on Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim, Sunan Abū Dawūd and Sunan Ibn
Mājah. Muḥammad ibn Muḥammad Ash-Shāfīʿī (death: 864 A.H.)
compiled an abridged version of his sharḥ.
18. The sharḥ of Zarakshī titled Tanqīḥ (‫)شرح الزركشي المسمى بالتنقيح‬
Muḥammad ibn Bahādur ibn ʿAbdullāh Turkī Al Aṣl Miṣrī Badr-ud-Dīn

Zarakshī (death: 794 A.H.) v wrote a concise sharḥ. Muḥammad ibn
Yūsuf Sanūsi Malikī (death: 895 A.H.) v compiled an abridged version.
Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar v and Qāḍī Muhib ud Dīn Baghdadi Hanbali (death 844
A.H.) v wrote some points on this revised version.
19. Taʿlīqul Maṣābīḥ ʿAlā Abwābil Jāmi’ Ṣaḥīḥ

(‫)تعليق المصابيح على ابواب الجامع الصحيح‬
This is a book authored by Abū ʿAbdullāh ibn Abī Bakr Makhzūmī v

(death 828 AH). Qasṭalānī v did muṭālaʿah from this book. Badr ud Dīn
was his title. He wrote this book for King Aḥmad Shāh Hindī. This is
what some people think. This is not written in the introduction of the
book, rather, in the end it is written that the publishing was completed
in Zubayd, Yemen on the tenth of Rabīʿul-Awwal 828 A.H.
Shāh ʿAbdul ʿAzīz Muḥaddith Dehlawī v has written that in the end he
came to Ahmedabad in India. He died there in Shaʿbān 828 AH. In “Nīlul
Abtāj”, it is mentioned that he died in Ghalbargha.
20. At-Tawshīḥ ʿAlāl Jāmi’ Saḥīḥ (‫)التوشيح على الجامع الصحيح‬
297
This is the book of Imām Suyūtī v (death 911 AH). Like the tanqīḥ
(revised version) of Zarakshī, there is one taʿlīq by the title, “Tarshīḥ”,
which is incomplete. Suyūti v wrote the taʿlīqāt for the Sihāh Sittah and
Muwaṭṭāʾ.
ʿAlī ibn Sulaymān Dimanatī24 Maghribī Malikī compiled the abridged

versions of all of them. The name of the abridged version of “Tawshīḥ”
is “Rūḥhut Tawshīh”. The amazing thing is that all these abridged
versions were written in approximately six months. They were all
published in the end of 1298 A.H. and in this same year the compiler of
the abridged versions passed away.
21. Sharḥ of Ibn Kathīr Dimashqī (‫)شرح ابن كثير الدمشقي‬
Death: 774 A.H.
This is a sharḥ of a portion from the beginning of the book.25
22. Fatḥul Bārī (‫)فتح الباري‬
This is the sharḥ of Ḥāfiẓ Zayn ud Dīn ʿAbdur Raḥmān ibn Aḥmad ibn
Rajab Dimashqī Ḥanbalī v (death: 795 AH). It is until Kitābul Janāʾiz.26
24 Suyūṭī v also wrote a commentary on Jāmiʿ Tirmidhī. Dimantī v summarised

it. Its title is “Quwwatul Mughtadī”. We have mentioned the details of this in
“Hadyatul Aḥwadhī”. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
25He is a giant muḥaddith and mufassir. Ibn Khathīr v has also written many
books on Ḥadīth. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
26He also has a commentary on Jāmiʿ Tirmidhī. We have mentioned its details
in the introduction of Tirmidhī. He was very great scholar. He was of a similar
mindset as Ibn Taymiyyah. His book “Laṭāʾif Al Ma-ʿārif” has been mentioned
previously. He prepared his grave and went and sleep in it and saw that it was
very good. He then left. When he died, he was buried there. See “Hadyatul
Aḥwadhī” for details. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
298
23. Fayḍul Bārī (‫)فيض الباري‬
Author: ʿAllāmah Sirājud Dīn Bulqinī27 Shafiʿī (death 805 AH) v.
He wrote a sharḥ by this title until Kitābul ʾĪmān which comprised of

fifty booklets. Qasṭalānī v complied it into one volume. Ibn Fahd said
that this is a very lengthy sharḥ. If it was completed, it would have been
one hundred (100) volumes.
24. Minhul Bārī Bis Saihil Fatīhil Majārā Fi sharḥ il Bukhārī

(‫)منح الباري بالسيح الفسيح المجاري في شرح البخاري‬
Author: ʿAllāmah Majdud Dīn Fayroz Ābādī Shīrāzī (death 817 AH) v
Qasṭalānī v mentioned that the name is “Fatḥul Bārī”. As said by

Qasṭalānī, twenty volumes consist of one quarter of the ʿibādāh (acts of
worship) and the full book is of forty volumes. A lot has been narrated
from the futūḥāt of Ibnil ʿArabī. For this reason, those who do not agree
with Ibnil ʿArabī find faults in it. Ḥāfiẓ v saw a small portion of it, which
was eaten by wood ants and thus, it could not be read.28
27This is the same Bulqinī who is Ḥāfiẓ Ṣāḥib’s teacher. He is the one who has
written very beautifully regarding the sequence of the chapter titles of Ṣaḥīḥ
Bukhārī. The translation of this has been mentioned in “Hadiyyatud Darārī”.
28This is Ḥāfiẓ Ṣāḥib’s teacher. He has written a very famous Arabic

dictionary, “Al-Qāmūs”. Murtaḍā Zabīdī, a man of Indian origin who moved to
reside in Egypt wrote the commentary (sharḥ) on Qāmūs, titled “Tāj ul ʿUrūs
min Jawāhirul Qāmūs”. Our teacher wrote a biography on Zabīdī which was
published in “Al Beʿthul Islāmī”. The Dārul ʿUlūm publishes this Arabic
magazine. Many Arabs are not aware that he was of Indian origin. He was
from Balgaram which is a city close to Lucknaw. At first, his family migrated to
Yemen and then to Cairo, Egypt. He was a great muḥaddith. [Extracted from Ifādātush
Shaykh]
299
25. Bahjatun Nufūs wa Ghāyatuhā Bi Maʿrifati mālahā wa Mā

ʿAlayhā (‫)بهجة النفوس وغايتها بمعرتة مالها وما عليها‬
ʿĀrifbillāh ʿAbdullāh ibn Abī Ḥamzah (death: 699 A.H.) v compiled an

abridged version of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī in which there is approximately
three hundred (300) aḥādīth. He omitted the chains of narration so
that it is easy to memorize. Thereafter, wrote a sharḥ in two volumes,
in which deep and intricate points has been mentioned. (Ḥāfiẓ usually
quotes his statements.) The respected author was a great saint of
karāmāt. He says that by the grace of Allāhl, I have never disobeyed
Allāhl. An Urdu translation for it has also been published.
26. Taghlīqut Taʿlīq (‫)تغليق تعليق‬
Author: Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar Asqalānī v
This is a very great book. No other book has ever been written like this.
In “Hadyus Sārī”, by omitting the chains of narrations, he summarized
this book. It was completed by 804 or 807 A.H. In this book, he
mentions the muʿallaq narrations of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī with their mawṣūl
chains. Some people say this was Ḥāfiẓ’s v first book (which was
published with his research and footnotes). Ḥāfiẓ himself compiled an
abridged version of it titled: “At tashwīq ilā waṣlil mubham minat
taʿlīq”. Thereafter, an abridged version of this was also compiled, titled:
“At tawfīq bi taʿlīqit taʿlīq”.
27. The sharḥ of Imām Raḍī ud Dīn Ḥasan ibn Muḥammad Ṣaghānī
Lāhūrī Ḥanafī (death: 650 A.H) ( ‫شرح األمام رضي الدين حسن بن محمد‬
‫)صغاني‬
This is a brief one-volume (sharḥ). Ṣaghānī is the author of “Mashāriq

ul Anwār”. His family were the residents of Ṣaghān in Mā warāʾun Nahr.
Someone from among his forefathers came to Lahore, and this was
where this Mawlānā Ḥasan was born. He was from the family of
300
Sayyidunā ʿUmarzand was a great linguist, scholar and muḥaddith. He

heard Ḥadīth from the great scholars of Makkah Mukarramah, ʿAdn,
and India. He went to India as a messenger for the khalīfah of Baghdad.
He passed away in Baghdad and according to his bequest, his body was
taken to Makkah Mukarramah. “Majmaʿul Baḥrayn” is the name of the
book he authored on Arabic language. He also wrote two booklets on
the topic of Ḥadīth, however, he included both ṣaḥīḥ and ḍaʿīf Ḥadīth.
Sakhāwī v complained about this in “Fatḥul Mughīth”.
28. The Sharḥ of Mawlā Fāḍil Aḥmad ibn Ismāʿīl ibn Muḥammad
Kawrānī Ḥanafī (death: 893 A.H)
(‫)شرح المولي الفاضل احمد بن اسماعيل بن محمد كوراني حنفي‬
The name of this sharḥ is “Al-kawtharul Jārī ʿAlā Riyāḍil Bukhārī”. He

refutes Ibn Ḥajar v and Kirmānī v. He completed writing it in 874 A.H.
This sharḥ comprises of two volumes. In this book, there are also
explanations of the difficult words and the vowelisation
(pronunciation) of the names of the narrators. This Shams Kawrānī
was the teacher of Muḥammad ibn ʿUthmān, the conqueror of Turkey29.
In the era of Sulṭān Muḥammad Khān he was promoted to the position
of issuing fatwā. Around this same time, he was also preoccupied in
writing the tafsīr of the Qurʾān, “Ghāyat ul Amālī”. He would engage in
worship the entire night and would complete one entire Qurʾān every
night. He was very outspoken and truthful.
29 On a wall outside an area in Istanbul, where it is said to be the grave of

Sayyidunā Abū Ayyūb Anṣārī z it is written that the Shaykh of Sulṭān
Muḥammad Fātiḥ, Shaykh Ahmad Shams-ud-Dīn was divinely inspired that
the grave of Sayyidunā Abū Ayyūb z is in this area. We visited it on one of our
travels in September 1993. We also saw it after this. In “Fatḥul Bārī” 6/103
Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar v writes that at the time of his death, Sayyidunā Abū Ayyūb
Anṣārī (Zayd ibn Khālid) z made a bequest that any sign of his grave should be
removed. (Fazl)
301
29. The Sharḥ of Imām Fakhr ud Dīn ʿAlī ibn Muḥammad Al Bazdawī
al Ḥanafī (death: 482 A.H) ( ‫شرح اإلمام فخر اإلسالم علي بن محمد البزدوي‬
‫)الحنفي‬
This is a brief sharḥ. ʿAllāmah Bazdawī Ḥanafī v was a great Imām, he

was an embodiment of all the varying fields of knowledge, an Imām of
the world with regards to the uṣūl and furūʿ. His mabsūṭ comprises of
eleven volumes. “Usūl Bazdawī” is a great and reliable book on the
principles of jurisprudence. He also authored a tafsīr which is said to
be one hundred and twenty (120) volumes, each of which is a large
book itself. Nawāb Sidīq Ḥasan Khān mentioned his date of death to be
884 A.H which is incorrect. The author of “Kashfuẓ Zunūn” also wrote
such, but that is an error. Imām Lucknawī v mentions this in
“Fawāʾidul Bahīyah”. (Muqaddamah Lāmiʿ pg. 141)
30. Kitāb un Najāḥ fī sharḥi kitāb il Akhbār iṣ Ṣiḥāḥ

(‫)كتاب النجاح في شرح أخبار الصحاح‬
Author: Shaykh Najmud Dīn Abī Ḥafṣ ʿUmar ibn Muḥammad ibn Aḥmad
ibn Ismāʿīl An-Nasafī Al-Imām, Az-Zāhid, Al-Ḥanafī v (death 537 A.H)
He was born in Nasf in 461 A.H and passed away in Samarqand.
It has been narrated that he went to visit ʿAllāmah Jārullāh

Zamakhsharī in Makkah Mukarramah, when he knocked on the door
Zamakhsharī asked: “Who is there?”
Nasafī: “ʿUmar.”
Zamakhsharī: “Go away/Return.” (‫)انصرف‬
Nasafī: ‫“ عمر َل ينصرف‬ʿUmar does not turn away.” (ʿUmar is not

munṣarif.)
Zamakhsharī: “When he is rejected, then he turns away.
302
(‫( )اذا ن ِّكر ينصرف‬When the word ʿumar is a common noun, it is

munṣarif.)
He was a faqīh, muḥaddith, mufassir, writer and muftī. He wrote a few

books on Ḥadīth and tafsīr. He narrated Ḥadīth from five hundred and
fifty (550) scholars. He would pass fatāwā for the Jinns. Due to this he
was known as Muftī-uth-Thaqalayn. He was the teacher of the author
of “Hidāyah”. Much is not known about this sharḥ.
31. Shawāhidut Tawdīḥ wat taṣhīh li Mushkilātil Jāmiʿuṣ Ṣaḥīḥ

(‫)شواهد التوضيح والتصحيح لمشكالت الجامع الصحيح‬
Author: Shaykh Jamālud Dīn Muḥammad ibn ʿAbdullāh ibn Mālik An-
Naḥwī Ash-Shāfiʿī v (death: 672 A.H)
This is a small booklet and is published in India. 30
He was born in either 600 or 602 A.H. He was extremely fluent in

languages. He was also an Imām in qirāʾah and a leader in justice. After
ṣalāh, the Qāḍī ul Qaḍāh, Shamsuddīn ibn Khalikān would escort him to
his residence. He also possessed an endless ocean of knowledge in
naḥw and ṣarf. He was righteous and a devout worshipper. He would
perform lots of optional ṣalāh. He authored many books.
32. The Sharḥ of Qāḍī Abī Bakr Muḥammad ibn ʿAbdullāh ibnul
ʿArabī Mālikī (‫دَّللا ابن العربي المالكي‬
ٰ ‫)شرح القاضي ابي بكر محمد بن عب‬
Death: 543 A.H.
30He did the tarkīb (grammatical analysis) of the text of those Ḥadīth which
comes in Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
303
Birth: 468 A.H
His sharḥ of Jāmiʿ Tirmidhī, “ʿĀriḍatul Aḥwadhi” is also famous. From

among his publications are: the sharḥ of the Ḥadīth of Umm Zaraʿ and a
tafsīr, “Anwārul Fajr fī Tafsīr il Qurʾān” which comprises of eighty (80)
volumes. He passed away while returning from Morocco and was taken
to Fez to be buried. (Muqaddamah Lāmiʿ pg.142) The details of this Bukhārī
sharḥ is not known.
33. Taʿlīq of ʿAllāmah Shamsud Dīn Aḥmad ibn Sulaymān ibn Kamāl
Pāshā (death: 940 A.H)31
(‫)تعليق العالمة شمس الدين احمد بن اسماعيل بن كمال پاشا‬
He acquired his knowledge from many prominent scholars. Among

them is Mawlā Luṭfā-e-Luṭfallāh Tawqānī Rumī v who was an
embodiment of manqūl (prophetic) and maʿqūl (rational) knowledge.
He wrote footnotes for a small portion of the beginning of Ṣaḥīḥ
Bukhārī. ʿAllāmah Ibn Kamāl Pāshā v served as judge of different areas.
In his final days, he became the Muftī of Constantinople and he passed
away there. He has many books which are reliable. The number of his
publications exceeds three hundred (300). He left behind a book in
almost every field.
Other than these, the author of “Kashfuẓ Ẓunūn” also mentioned the
talīqāt of ʿAllāmah Faḍl ibn Jamāl v (death: 991 A.H) and Muṣliḥud Dīn
Muṣṭafā ibn Sa’bān As Sarūrī v.
31He mentioned the seven categories of the fuqahāʾ and there are objections
against this. See: Sīrah Imām Abū Yūsuf. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
304
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS ABRIDGED VERSIONS
Abridged Versions
Many people compiled abridged versions of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī:
34. Al-Mufhim (‫)المفهم‬

One ikhtiṣār (abridgement) is that of Shaykh Jamālud Dīn Abul ʿAbbās
Aḥmad ibn ʿUmar Anṣārī Qurṭubī v (death: 656 A.H). He is famous by
Ibnul Muzayyin and his title is Ḍiyāʾ-ud-Dīn. He was a great Malikī
scholar. He made Iskhandariyyah1 his place of residence and passed
away there. He wrote a very comprehensive sharḥ of Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim
which is titled, “Mufhim”. He compiled abridged versions of both Ṣaḥīḥ
Bukhārī and Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim. He was born in 598 A.H.
35. At-Tajrīduṣ Ṣarīḥ li Aḥādīthil Jāmiʿ Ṣaḥīḥ

(‫)التجريد الصريح ألحاديث الجامع الصحيح‬
Another famous abridgement is “At Tajrīdus Ṣarīḥ li Aḥādīthil Jāmiʿ-us-

Ṣaḥīḥ” which was compiled by Shaykh Imām Zayn-ud-Dīn Abul ʿAbbās
Aḥmad ibn Aḥmad ibn ʿAbdul Laṭīf Sharjī Zubaydī v (death: 893 A.H).
The chains of narration and the repeated narrations have been omitted
and only the matn (text of the Ḥadīth) is mentioned. It was completed
in 889 A.H. Shaykh Sharqāwī v and Shaykh Ghazī v wrote a
commentary on this edition. This book has also been translated in
Urdu.
N.B. The copy of this book published in Egypt has the author’s name as
Ḥusayn ibn Mubārak Zabīdī, which is incorrect. Ḥusayn Zabīdī passed
away in 631 A.H. His name comes in the chain of narration of Ṣaḥīḥ
Bukhārī. The author of “Tajrīd” is Aḥmad ibn ʿAbdul Laṭīf Zabīdī. He
passed away in 893 A.H. Kawtharī v has written this and the
commentators of “Tajrīd” also mentioned this name. The author of
“ʿAwnul Bārī” also mentioned this as the author’s name.
1 Iskhandariyah was also the residence of Ibn Ḥumām v. [Extracted from Ifādātush
Shaykh]
305
36. Irshādus Sāmiʿ Wal Qārī Al-Muntaqā min Ṣaḥīḥil Bukhārī
(‫)ارشاد السامع والقارى المنتقى من صحيح البخاري‬
Another abridgement is that of Shaykh Badr-ud-Dīn Ḥusayn ibn ʿUmar

Halabī v (death: 779 A.H). Its title is: “Irshādus Sāmiʾ wal Qārī Al-
Muntaqā min Ṣaḥīḥ il Bukhārī”.
37. An-Naṣīḥ fi Ikhtiyāriṣ Ṣaḥīḥ (‫)النصيح في اختيار الصحيح‬
The commentator of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī, Shaykh Mihlab Tamīmī v also

compiled an abridgement. Its title is: “An Naṣīh fi Ikthiyāriṣ Ṣaḥīḥ” as
mentioned previously.
38. Al Ifhām bimā Waqaʿ fīl Bukhārī minal Ibhām
(‫)اإلفهام بما وقع في البخاري من االوهام‬
Shaykh Jalāl-ud-Dīn ʿAbdur ʿRaḥmān ibn ʿUmar Bulqīnī v (death: 824

A.H.) wrote a book on the ibhām (ambiguous portions) of Ṣaḥīḥ
Bukhārī, the title of which is “Al Ifhām bimā Waqaʿ fīl Bukhārī minal
Ibhām” It was completed in 822 A.H.
39. Shaykh Imām Abū Naṣr Aḥmad ibn Muḥammad ibn Ḥusayn
Kalābādhī v (death: 398 A.H) wrote a book on the narrators of Ṣaḥīḥ
Bukhārī.
40. Kitābut Taʿdīl wat Takhrīj li Rijālil Bukhārī
(‫)كتاب التعديل والتخريج لرجال البخاري‬
Qāḍī Abul Walīd Sulaymān ibn Khalaf al-Bājī v (death: 474 A.H) wrote
“Kitābut Taʿdīl wat Takhrīj li Rijālil Bukhārī”. He is ascribed to Baja,
Andalus.
41. Taʿliqul ʿAllāmah As-Sindī Al-Ḥanafī (‫)تعليق العالمة السندي‬
306
The taʿlīq of ʿAllāmah Sindī Ḥanafī v (death: 1138 A.H). His name is
Abul Ḥasan Nūr-ud-Dīn Muḥammad ibn ʿAbdul Hādī. He was born in
Thatta, Sindh and he grew up there. Then he travelled to Tustar. He
benefitted from the scholars there. Thereafter, he migrated to Madīnah
Munawwarah. He obtained knowledge from the shuyūkh of Madīnah,
the likes of Shaykh Sayyid Barzanjī v, and Shaykh Ibrāhīm Kūrānī v
and began giving lessons in the Ḥaram. He was famous for his virtues
and excellence. He wrote beneficial books. He also penned footnotes
for the Siḥāḥ Sittah. The footnotes for Jāmiʿ Tirmidhī are incomplete.
He penned an excellent annotative commentary for Musnad Aḥmad. He
also compiled a few books on fiqh and usūl fiqh. (He also penned
footnotes on “Bayḍāwī” and “Fatḥul Qadīr” until Kitābun Nikāḥ. (Fawāiʾd
Jāmiʿah pg. 220)
He passed away on 12 Shawwāl 1138 A.H.2 On that day, the shops

remained closed and many people attended his janāzah. The
authorities also lifted his corpse to Masjid Nabawī. He was buried in
Baqīʿ. (Muqaddamah Lāmiʿ pg. 144)
Shaykh Muḥammad Ḥayāt Sindhī v was his student. (Fawāiʾd Jāmiʿah pg.
217)
Note: there are two scholars famous by the name ʿAllāmah Sindhī. One
is Sindhī Kabīr- the aforementioned, ʿAllāmah Abul Ḥasan Nūr-ud-Dīn.
The other is Imām Abul Ḥasan Muḥammad Ṣādiq Sindhī. He was also
born in Sind and migrated to Madīnah. He is famous by the title Ṣaghīr
so that he could be differentiated from Kabīr. He benefited from
Shaykh Muḥammad Ḥayāt Sindhī for some time 3 and thereafter
commenced teaching in Masjid Nabawī. He was an unmatched scholar
2It has also been mentioned that he passed away in 1136 A.H., 1139 A.H. or
1141 A.H. (Fawāiʾd Jāmiʿah page 220)
3One ruling discussed is regarding whether the hand is held on the chest or
under the navel in ṣalāḥ. Many booklets were written regarding this. The
Sindhis wrote these. Muḥammad ̣Ḥayāt Sindhī was among them. [Extracted from
Ifādātush Shaykh]
307
of his time. He also wrote a commentary on “Jāmiʿ Usūl”. He passed

away in 1087 A.H. in Madīnah Munawwarah. (Lāmiʿ) (1187 A.H. is
correct.) 4
42. Minhul Bārī Sharḥul Bukhārī (‫)منح الباري شرح البخاري‬
This is a Persian book written by Shaykh Muḥammad Ḥasan ibn

Muḥammad Ṣiddīq Peshāwarī Ḥanafī v. Due to his height, he was
known as Ḥāfiẓ Darāz. He was famous in his era for fiqh, tafsīr and
Ḥadīth. He studied by his father and spent his entire life learning,
teaching and spreading knowledge. He passed away in 1263 A.H. at the
age of 61.
43. Ḍawʾud Darārī (‫)ضوء الدراري‬
This is the book of Mawlānā Sayyid Ghulām ʿAlī Āzād Balgharāmī v. It is

actually an abridgement of Qasṭalānī’s “Irshādus Sārī” with a few
additional points. It is until Kitābuz Zakāh. He passed away in
Aurangabad. He passed away in either 1194 A.H. or 1200 A.H. He was
born in either 1110 A.H. or 1112 A.H. His title was Hassān-ul-Hind.5
44. Taysīrul Qārī (‫)تيسير القاري‬
This is a Persian book written by the son of Shāh ʿAbdul Ḥaq

Muḥaddith Dehlawī v, ʿAllāmah Nūrul Ḥaq Dehlawī v (death 1073
A.H.). It is published in India in six volumes. He studied by his father.
King Shāh Jahān made him the judge of Agra (Akbarabad) and he
fulfilled the right of this position with great honesty. This commentary
‫ (نزهة‬.‫ مات ليلة الجمعة لخمس بقين من شهر رمضان سنة سبع وثمانين ومئة وألف بالمدينة المنورة‬4
.‫) فالظاهر أن لفظ المأة سقط فى اَلمع‬٩/۶‫الخواطر‬
He died on the night of Jumuʾah, when there was five days remaining of
Ramaḍān 1187 A.H. in Madīnah Munawwrah. (Nuzhatul Khawāṭir 9/6) so it is
apparent the word ‘hundred’ had been omitted in Lāmiʿ.
5 He was a great poet. This is why he was known as Hassānul Hind. [Extracted from
Ifādātush Shaykh]
308
was published with the help of Nawāb Maḥmūd ʿAlī Khān, the governor
of Tonk in 1298 A.H. In the footnotes, he included the commentaries of
Shaykh-ul-Islām, Muḥammad ibn Muhibullāh Dehlawī (in Persian) and
Ḥāfiẓ Darāz. Mawlānā ʿAbdul Hay Luknawī endorsed this compilation.
ʿAllāmah Nūrul Ḥaq Bukhārī Dehlawī v was the substantiation of the
saying, ‘‫‘( ’الولد سر َلبيه‬A son (child) is the happiness of his father.’)
He passed away in 1073 A.H. in Delhi at the age 90 or 92. He wrote this
commentary on the request of his father.
45. Ḍiyāʾ us Sārī (‫)ضياء الساري‬
This is Shaykh ʿAbdullāh ibn Sālim Baṣrī Makkī’s v (death: 1134 A.H.)
book. He was unable to complete it. Shāh Walīullāh Muḥaddīth Dehlawī
v wrote a biography of him in “Insānul ʿUyūn”. 6 One of his
praiseworthy feats is his work on the taṣḥīh of the Ṣiḥāḥ Ṣittah on
which he spent approximately twenty years. He read Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī in
the Kaʿbah.7
46. Fayḍul Bārī: Sharḥ of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī (‫)فيض الباري شرح صحيح البخارى‬
This was compiled by Sayyid ʿAbdul Awwal ibn ʿAlī ibn ʿAlā al Ḥusaynī
v (death: 968 A.H. in Delhi).8 His family were the residents of Zaidpur
in the district of Jaunpur. Someone from among his forefathers moved
to Dakan where he was born and grew up. He learnt Ḥadīth from his
grandfather ʿAlāʾ-ud-Dīn v, who learnt from Shaykh Ḥusayn v, who
learnt from Muḥammad ibn Jazarī v, the author of “Hiṣn-ul-Haṣīn”.
6 The pupil of the eye. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]

7 He was the famous Shaykh of Makkah Mukarramah. He was born in Makkah
and also passed away in Makkah. He has been mentioned in many places. He is
in our chain of narration, both for the Musalsalāt and the Rasāʾil Awāʾil. (Al
Imdād fī Maʿrifati ʿUlūmil Isnād) [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
8 This is near our province. Once it was known as Shīrāz Hind. [Extracted from
Ifādātush Shaykh]
309
Shaykh ʿAbdul Awwal v then went to Gujarat 9 where he stayed for

some time. Then he went to the Ḥaramayn Sharīfayn. He stayed in
Ahmedabad for some time after his return from ḥajj and ziyārah.
Thereafter, he went to Delhi where he stayed for two years. He passed
away in Delhi in 968 A.H. and was buried in the graveyard of Ghurabāʾ.
This commentary is well-researched, accurate and approved.10
47. Nūrul Qārī (‫)نور القاري‬
This was compiled by Shaykh Nūr-ud-Dīn ibn Muḥammad Sāliḥ al

Gujaratī Aḥmedbādī v (death 1155 A.H) of Ahmedabad. He was born in
1063 A.H. He began his quest for knowledge from childhood. He
studied the “Ghulistān” of Shaykh Sāʿdī from his mother in one week.
He acquired the knowledge of Ḥadīth from Shaykh Muḥammad Jaʿfar
Ḥusaynī Bukhārī v. He also received ṭarīqat from him. Akram-ud-Dīn
Gujarāti built a grand madrasah in Ahmedabad for him, in which he
spent one hundred and twenty-four thousand.
Shaykh Nūr-ud-Dīn v was a very Allāh conscious person (muttaqī). He

would perform tahajjud twice during the night. When lying down, he
would recite the Kalimah Tahlīl one thousand times and Durūd Sharīf
one thousand times. He would not accept the gifts of the kings. He went
for ḥajj in 1143 A.H. On returning after a year, he visited the shrine of
Sulṭānul Awliyāʾ (the leader of the awliyāʾ), Ḥazrat Nizāmuddīn v. He
has more than one hundred and fifty (150) publications. Apart from
“Nūrul Qārī”, he wrote footnotes for many books such as, “Sharḥ
9The people of Gujarat value the ʿulamāʾ, specifically Ahmedabad as it became

the centre and sanctuary for the ʿulamāʾ. There are lots of historical details
regarding this. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
10 But it is not available. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
310
Mawāqif”, “Sharḥ Mutāliʿ”, “Talwīḥ”, “Sharḥ Wiqāyah” and others.11 His

grave is close to the Ahmedabad Madrasah.
Marginalia (Footnotes)
48. ʿAllāmah Muḥaddith Kabīr Aḥmad ʿAlī Sahāranpūrī (death: 1297

A.H.) v
These footnotes are printed in the edition of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī published
in India. It is very beneficial for students. After reading this, it would
not be necessary for beginners to read any other footnote. About
twenty-five (25) volumes of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī were written by Muḥaddith
Aḥmad ʿAlī Sahāranpūrī v. The remaining five volumes were written by
Mawlānā Muḥammad Qāsim Nanotwī v who also passed away in
Jumād-al-Ūlā 1297 A.H, two days prior to Shaykh Aḥmad ʿAlī
Sahāranpūrī. Ḥazrat Sahāranpūrī passed away on the 6th and Ḥazrat
Nanotwī on the 4th.
Shaykh Aḥmad Sahāranpūrī v was born around 1225 A.H. He studied

the syllabus books of fiqh and Ḥadīth with the scholars of India. Then,
he desired to be taught by Musnidul Hind, Mawlānā Shāh Muḥammad
Ishāq Dehlawī Muhājir Makkī v. Mawlānā Dehlawī v had already
migrated in Dhul-Qaʿdah 1225 A.H. Therefore, Mawlānā Sahāranpūrī v
travelled to Makkah. In Makkah, he wrote the books of aḥādīth with his
hands and then read them to Shāh Muḥammad Ishāq v. From Fajr to
Ẓuhr, he would copy and record the Ḥadīth and then from Ẓuhr to ʿAṣr,
he would read. He read all the books of Ḥadīth in this manner.
On returning from Ḥijāz, he established the Ahmadiyyah Publishing
House, from where the books of Ḥadīth were edited and published
with footnotes. This was the first Publishing House in India to publish
Ḥadīth books.
11“Sharḥ Nukhbah: is not mentioned here, however, he also wrote a footnote

on this. He also wrote footnotes on “Bayḍawī” among other books. [Extracted from
Ifādātush Shaykh]
311
This Publishing House reminded until Ghadr12 (the betrayal) in 1857

(1273 A.H) and continued publishing many beneficial books. When the
British betrayed the brave Shāh Zufar and martyred him, there was
great turmoil in Delhi due to which this Publishing House was
destroyed.13 Within a few days it was reopened in Meerut and from
here a few books were published with Muḥaddith Sahāranpūrī’s edited
footnotes. In Meerut, Ḥazrat Nanotwī v was also preoccupied in the
editing and publishing of books. 14
The publishing of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī with this footnote began in 1264 A.H.
in Delhi and was completed on 1270 A.H. It was published a second
time by Ahmadiyyah publishers in Meerut in 1280 A.H. and it
continued to be published after this. This service of Muḥaddith
Sahāranpūrī v and Ḥazrat Nanotwī v was so greatly accepted that this
became the foundation for all other future publications.
‫جزاهما هللا خير الجزاء عنا وعن سائر قارئ الكتاب الحديثية‬
49. Ghāyat-ut-Tawḍīḥ (‫)غاية التوضيح‬

Author: Shaykh Yaʿqūb ibn Ḥasan Ṣarfī Kashmīrī Ḥanafī (death: 1003
A.H.) v.
He was born in 908 A.H. in Kashmīr. He travelled to the Ḥaramayn and

heard Ḥadīth from Shaykh Ibn Ḥajar Makkī v.15 A few publications of
his are as follows: “Tafsīrul Qurʾān” which is incomplete, the
commentary of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī, “Gazwāte Nabawī” among others.
12 Ghadr meaning conflict. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]

13The English came in slowly and reached Kolkata. Thereafter from there,
they reached the capital, Delhi and with deception and chaos they martyred
the brave Shāh Ẓufar v and occupied Delhi. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
14ShaykhulHind v also studied by Ḥazrat Nānotwī v during this time. This will
be mentioned further on. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
15He was also the teacher of Mullā ʿAlī Qārī v. They both shared the same
teacher. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
312
50. The Sharḥ of Shaykh ʿUthmān ibn ʿĪsā ibn Ibrāhīm Sindhī
Burhānpūrī v (death: martyred in 1008 A.H.)
(‫)شرح شيخ عثمان بن عيسى بن ابراهيم سندهي برهانپوري‬
He was born and raised in a village named Bubakan. He went to
Gujarat and studied fiqh and uṣūl fiqh from Shaykh Wajīhud Dīn
(Aḥmad Ābādī) v and others. When he went to Burhānpūr in 983 A.H.,
the amīr, Muḥammad Shāh ibn Mubārak16 honoured him and promoted
him to the position of iftāʾ and teaching. He maintained this post for
twenty-seven years. He excelled in manṭīq (logic) and ḥikmah and he
was also an experienced doctor. He was a very righteous, God-fearing
person. He would stay away from all doubtful things. He did not eat
anyone’s food for forty (40) years. He wrote a commentary on Ṣaḥīḥ
Bukhārī. He wrote a marginalia on “Bayḍawī” and he also compiled
some other books. In the end of his life, he migrated to a village in
Burhānpūr. Here, bandits martyred him along with seventeen others
from his home. May Allāhl have mercy on him.
51. The Sharḥ of Shaykh Ṭāhir ibn Yūsuf As-Sindhī Burhānpūrī v

(death: 1004 A.H.) () (‫)شرح الشيخ طاهر بن يوسف السندهي البرهانپوري‬
This commentary was sourced from Qasṭalānī’s commentary. The
author was born in Pāyrī, a village in Sindh. In his childhood, he
accompanied his father and went to Shaykh Shihāb-ud-Dīn Sindhī v. He
studied Ghazālī’s “Minhāj” by him. In 905 A.H., he went to Gujarat and
stayed for quite some time in the company of Shaykh ʿAbdul Awwal ibn
ʿAlī Ḥusaynī Jawnpūrī Dehlawī v and acquired the knowledge of
Ḥadīth. He then went to Khandesh and settled in Burhānpūr. Among
his books are: “Tafsīr Majmaʿul Baḥrayn” which is in line with the taste
and fervour of the ṣūfīs, the abridgement of Qasṭalānī’s Al-Mawāhib Al-
Laduniyyah and the abridgement of Kirmānī’s “Sharḥ Asmāʾ Rijālil
Bukhārī”.
16 The town became famous due to kings and scholars. [Extracted from Ifādātush
Shaykh]
313
52. Al-Khayrul Jārī (‫)الخير الجاري‬

Author: Shaykh Yaʿqūb Abū Yūsuf Bayānī v (death: 1098 A.H.)
Shaykh Abū Yūsuf Yaʿqūb v was born in Lahore. He was very famous
with regards to fiqh and Ḥadīth. He was an embodiment of maʿqūl
(prophetic) and manqūl (rational) (knowledge), fiqh and usūl. He was
a teacher in Madrasah Shāhjahāniyah. Many people benefitted from
him here. He excelled in Ḥadīth. He would indirectly refer to Fāḍil
Sayālkūtī in his classes.17 He wrote a commentary on Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī
titled “Al-Khayrul Jārī”, a commentary of Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim titled “Al-
Muʿallim”, a commentary of Muwaṭṭāʾ titled “Muṣṭafā” and a marginalia
on “Bayḍāwī”. He passed away in Delhi in 1098 A.H. and was buried in
his home. His grave is well known and is visited. This three-volume
commentary is preserved in the state library of Rāmpūr. Muḥaddith
Sahāranpūrī v used this commentary as a source while compiling his
marginalia on Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī. He mentions this in his introduction.
53.Fayḍul Bārī (‫)فيض الباري‬

Author: Shaykh Muḥammad Aʿẓam ibn Sayfud Dīn Sarhindī Al-ʿUmrī Al-
Ḥanafī v (death: 1114 A.H.)
He was born and grew up in Sarhind. At first, he studied with his

paternal uncle then with his honourable father. He spiritually reformed
himself under the guidance of his father. He wrote a beneficial
commentary on Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī. He is buried in Sarhind next to his
father.
54. The Sharḥ of Shaykhul Islām Muḥammad ibn Muḥibbullāh

Bukhārī Dehlawī (‫)شرح شيخ االسالم محمد بن محب هللا البخاري الدهلوي‬
This commentary consists of 6 volumes. It is published in the footnotes
of Shaykh Nūrul Ḥaq Muḥaddith Dehlawī’s commentary, “Taysīrul
17 He wrote a marginalia on “Sharḥ ʿAqāʾid” titled, “Khayālī”. [Extracted from

Ifādātush Shaykh]
314
Qārī”. He was from the family of Shaykh-ul-Islām Shāh ʿAbdul Ḥaq

Muḥaddith Dehlawī v. His lineage and sanad is:
Muḥammad narrates from Fakhrud Dīn Abil Makārim ʿAbduṣ Ṣamad,
from his father, Shaykh Muḥibbullāh ibn Shaykh Nūrullāh, from his
great grandfather, the famous author, Shaykh Nūrul Ḥaq, from his
father, Shaykh-ul-Muḥaddithīn ʿAbdul Ḥaq ibn Ṣayf-ud-Dīn Dehlawī
(place of residence) Al-Bukhārī (origin), Adh-Dhakī (by lineage) Al-
Ḥanafī (his madh-hab) Al-Qādirī (silsilah) An-Naqshabandī.
In the era of Shaykh-ul-Islām Sulṭān Muḥammad Shāh, he was

appointed as the chief judge in Shahjahanabad and he remained in this
position until the beginning of the era of Nādir Shāh. He thereafter
passed away and was buried in the graveyard of Shaykh ʿAbdul Ḥaq
Muḥaddith. The year of his death is unknown.
55. ʿAwnul Bārī fī Ḥalli Adillatil Bukhārī

(‫) عون الباري في حل أدلة البخاري لسيد النواب صديق حسن خان الحسيني البخارى القنوجي البهوبالي‬
Author: Sayyid Nawāb Ṣiddīq Ḥasan Khan Al-Ḥusaynī Al-Bukhārī Al-
Qanūjī Al-Bhūbālī v (death:1307 A.H.)
He was among the great ʿulamāʾ of the ghayr muqallidīn. However, he
respected the mujtahidīn, fuqahāʾ and ṣūfiyyah. This commentary
consists of four volumes. This is the commentary of “Tajrīdus Ṣaḥīḥ”,
an abridgement of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī. “Tajrīdus Ṣaḥīḥ” was compiled by
Shaykh Shihāb-ud-Dīn Abul ʿAbbās Aḥmad ibn Aḥmad ibn Zayn-ud-Dīn
ʿAbdul Laṭīf Ash-Sharjī Az-Zabīdī Al-Ḥanafī (death: 893 A.H.). Nawāb
Ṣiddīq Ḥasan Khān ṣāḥib was born in 1148 A.H. His books are famous.
Amongst them are: “Al-Ḥiṭṭah bidhikriṣ Ṣiḥāḥ Sittah”, “Itḥāfun Nubalāʾ
Muttaqīn biiḥyāʾ Ma-āthirul Fuqahāʾ wal Muḥaddithīn” and “Abjadul
ʿUlūm”. He compiled a commentary on Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī titled “Ghunyatul
Qārī” which was published in India.
56. Fayḍuṭ Ṭārī- Sharḥ Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī (‫)الفيض الطاري الشرح صحيح البخاري‬
315
Author: Shaykh Jaʿfar ibn Muḥammad Al-Ḥusaynī Al-Bukhārī Gujarātī

(death: 1085 A.H.) v
It is mentioned in “Nuzhatul Khawāṭir” that most probably, he was
famously known as Badr ʿĀlam. He was born in 1023 A.H. His
household was a household of knowledge and ṭariqah (spirituality). He
studied and benefitted from his father and other teachers. He excelled
his father in Ḥadīth, tafsīr and taṣawwuf. After the death of his
grandfather, Muḥammad ibn Jalāl, even during the lifetime of his
father, he was appointed as the spiritual guide of the spiritual
gatherings of advice. He was quick at writing and could write the
Qurʾān in fifty-four (54) hours. His book, “Kitābur Rawḍāt” consists of
few volumes. He also authored a few booklets of tafsīr. He is buried
alongside his father.
57. Iʿānatul Qārī-Sharḥ Thulāthiyātul Bukhārī

(‫)اعانة القاري شرح ثالثيات البخاري‬
Author: Shaykh Yaḥyā ibn Amīnul ʿAbbāsī Ilahabadi v (death: 1144
A.H.)
He was born in 1080 A.H. He acquired knowledge from his uncle,
Shaykh Muḥammad Faḍl v. After his (uncle’s) death, his
responsibilities were handed over to him. There was no ʿālim and
spiritual guide like him in his era or city. Apart from “Iʿānutul Qārī”, he
wrote many other books.
Note: Mullā ʿAlī Qārī v (death: 1014 A.H), Muḥammad Shāh ibn Ḥasan
v (death: 939 A.H.) and Shaykh Mawlānā ʿAbdul Bāṭin ibn Mawlwī
Rustam ʿAlī ibn Mullā ʿAlī Aṣghar v (death: 1149 AH) also wrote
commentaries on the thulāthiyāt of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī.
58. Nibrāsus Sārī Fī Aṭrāfil Bukhārī (‫)نبراس الساري في أطراف البخاري‬
Author: Shaykh Muḥammad ʿAbdul ʿAzīz Ḥanafī Suhālwī v
In this book, the section in which each ḥadīth of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī can be
found is mentioned. This book is very beneficial for studying the aṭrāf
and ṭurūq of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī. The author was the student of Shaykh-ul-
Hind v. He also studied by Mawlānā Khalīl Aḥmad Sahāranpūrī v and
316
Mawlānā Ḥusayn ʿAlī Panjābī v. Mawlānā Ḥusayn was the student of

Ḥazrat Gangohī v. He compiled a summary of the lectures of Ṣaḥīḥ
Bukhārī which were delivered in 1303 A.H.
Mawlānā Muḥammad ʿAbdul ʿAzīz v also wrote an excellent, valuable

marginalia of “Naṣbur Rāyah” until Kitābul Ḥajj.18
59. Lāmiʿud Darārī ʿAlā Jāmiʿil Bukhārī (‫)المع الدراري على جامع البخاري‬
This is the discourse of Ḥazrat Mawlānā Rashīd Aḥmad Ghangohī v
(death: 1323 AH) which Ḥazrat Mawlānā Muḥammad Yaḥyā
Khāndhelwī v complied from Ḥazrat’s last class in year 1313 A.H. 19
Ḥazrat Shaykhul Ḥadīth, Mawlānā Muḥammad Zakariyyā published it
with a very comprehensive and beneficial marginalia and introduction.
It consists of three volumes.
60. Fayḍul Bārī ʿalā Ṣaḥīḥil Bukhārī (‫)فيض الباري على صحيح البخاري‬
This is the discourses of ʿAllāmah ʿAnwar Shāh Kashmīrī v (death:
1352 A.H.) which Mawlānā Badre-ʿĀlim Mirthī compiled in Jamiʿah
Islāmiyah Taʿlīmud Dīn Dabhel. Majlisī ʿIlmī Dhabel, Simlak published it
in four volumes from Cairo, Egypt. This is the discourse of his last class
as mentioned by the compiler.
61. Darse Bukhārī [Faḍlul Bārī] (‫)درس بخاري‬

ʿAllāmah Shabīr Aḥmed ʿUthmānī v, the commentator of Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim
(death: 1369 A.H.). One volume was published by Jamiʿah Islāmiyah
after Mawlānā Ḥabībur Raḥmān Aʿẓmī v reviewed it. Mawlānā ʿAbdul
Waḥīd Ṣāḥib Ṣiddīqī v compiled these lectures. This discourse, along
18“Naṣbur Rāyah” consists of four volumes. He wrote the footnotes of the first
volume. The remaining three volumes were written by Mawlānā Muḥammad
Yūsuf Kāmilpūrī v. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
19We have written more details on this in the introduction of Jāmiʿ Tirmidhī,
“Kawkabud Durrī”. The full details regarding when Ḥazrat Gangohī v
commenced and completed dorah ḥadīth is written in that introduction.
317
with some additions, were published in Pakistan in two volumes under

the title “Faḍlul Bārī” by Mawlānā Qāḍī ʿAbdur Raḥmān ṣāḥib v. He was
unable to complete the remainder. So many additions were made to
this commentary that it became a separate commentary.20
62.Taqrīr Bukhārī (‫)تقرير بخاري‬
Author: Ḥazrat Shaykhul Islām Mawlānā Ḥusayn Aḥmad Madnī v
(death: 1377 A.H), Shaykhul Ḥadīth Dārul ʿUlūm Deabond. A small
portion of this dictation, from the beginning until the beginning of
Kitābul Imān has been published. Many students compiled the lectures
of Ḥazrat Madnī v.
63. Tashkīl Asānīdul Bukhārī (‫)تشكيل اسانيد البخاري‬21

Author: Mawlānā Fārūq Aḥmad Anbhatwī Sahāranpūrī, Shaykhul
Ḥadīth of Jamiʿah ʿAbbāsiyah, Bhāwalpūr, Pakistan.
In this commentary, the author mentions the chains of narrations of
Ḥazrat Ghangohī, Ḥazrat Nānotwī, Mawlānā Khalīl Aḥmad Sahāranpūrī,
Shaykhul Hind, Ḥazrat Thanwī, Ḥazrat Madnī, ʿAllāmah Kashmirī and
20 In “Faḍlul Bārī”, it is not known which points were mentioned by ʿAllāmah

ʿUthmānī and which points were added by Mawlānā Qāḍī ʿAbdur Raḥmān
ṣāḥib. It has become completely combined. It is no longer ʿAllāmah ʿUthmānī’s
discourse alone. However, the one which has been published by Jamiʿah
Dabhel is purely ʿAllāmah ʿUthmānī’s. The tone, style and all the words are
ʿAllāmah ʿUthmānī’s. Upon reading it, one remembers ʿAllāmah ʿUthmānī.
ʿAllāmah ʿUthmānī is a giant scholar. His memoirs, titled “Tajalliyāt ʿUthmānī”
have been published. This should be read. Ḥazrat Nanotwī’s knowledge has
been transferred to him. For this reason, he mentions the specialities of Islām
in a very unique style. Ḥazrat Thānvī placed his own ʿamāmah on his
[ʿAllāmah ʿUthmānī’s] head. He was the bearer of Ḥazrat Nānotwī’s
knowledge. He remained as the Shaykhul Ḥadīth of Dārul ʿUlūm Deoband for a
very long time and many ʿulamāʾ graduated during this time. Nowadays, one
may find many students of Shaykhul Islām ʿAllāmah Shabīr Aḥmad ʿUthmānī.
The students of ʿAllāmah Kashmīrī most probably have all passed away.
21 The sanads of Bukhārī were mentioned in one form. [Extracted from Ifādātush
Shaykh]
318
other mashāyikh � until Imām Bukhārī v. He also placed it in chart

form due to which understanding the chains become very easy.22
64. Īḍāḥul Bukhārī (‫)ايضاح البخاري‬

This is the compilation of the lectures of Mawlānā Fakhrud Dīn ṣāḥib v,
Shaykhul Ḥadīth of Dārul ʿUlūm Deoband. 23 It was compiled by
Mawlānā Riyāsat ʿAlī Bijnūrī ṣāḥib in thirteen parts in two volumes.
65. Anwārul Bārī (‫)انوار الباري‬

Compiler: Mawlānā Sayyid Aḥmad Raḍā Bijnūrī v, the student of
ʿAllāmah Anwar Shāh Kashmīrī v. This is a commentary of Ṣaḥīḥ
Bukhārī in light of the lectures of ʿAllāmah Kashmīrī on Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī.
It consists of a very beneficial two-volume introduction. This
commentary has been published in approximately twenty volumes.
66. Al-Abwāb wat Tarājim (‫)االبواب والتراجم‬24

Author: Ḥazrat Shaykhul Ḥadīth Mawlānā Muḥammad Zakariyyā ṣāḥib
v
67. Taqrīr Bukhārī (‫)تقرير بخاري‬
22Recently, “Al-Kalāmul Mufīd” (a new book) by a Bangladeshi ʿālim was

published. Mawlānā Rūḥul Amīn Farīdpūrī mentioned the biography of each of
the rijāl (narrators) in all the sanads of Mawlānā ʿAbdur Rashīd Nuʿmānī. It is
a very beneficial book. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
23After Ḥazrat Madnī, he was the Shaykhul Ḥadīth of Dārul ʿUlūm Deoband. He
also remained the Shaykhul Ḥadīth for a long time. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
24 In this commentary, there is a very detailed commentary on the Tarājimul
Abwāb of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
319
These are Ḥazrat Shaykhul Ḥadīth Mawlānā Muḥammad Zakariyyā

ṣāḥib’s lectures of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī compiled by Mawlānā Muḥammad
Shāhid Sahāranpūrī v.
68. Irshādul Qārī (‫)ارشاد القاري‬

The lectures of Mawlānā Muftī Rashīd Aḥmad Ludhyānwī v. (death: 6th
Dhūl Ḥijjah 1422 A.H.)
69. ʿĀdātul Imām Bukhārī fī Ṣaḥīḥi (‫)عادات االمام البخاري‬

Shaykh ʿAbdul Ḥaq ibn ʿAbdul Wāhid Al-Hāshimī Al-Makkī v (1302-
1392 A.H.)
Those who wrote an istikhrāj of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī are as follows:
1. Abū Bakr Aḥmad ibn Ibrāhīm ʿIsmāʿīlī Jurjānī v (death: 371 A.H.)
2. Abū Bakr ibn Muḥammad Khawārzamī Burqānī v (death: 425
A.H.)
3. Abū Aḥmad Muḥammad ibn Ḥāmid Ghatrīfī Jurjānī v (death: 377
A.H.)
4. Muḥammad ibn Abū ʿAbbās ʿAbdullāh ibn Dhuhal Dhibī Harawī v
(death: 378 A.H.)
5. Abū Bakr ibn Mardawiyah Aḥmad ibn Musā Aṣbahānī v (death: 416
A.H.) (Tadrībur Rāwī 111/1 and Tarjumah ʿAwāriful Manan ʿAllāmah
Binnorī)
Sirājul Qārī: Ḥazrat Shaykh Muḥammad Zakariyyā ṣāḥib’s lectures of

Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī (compiled by) Mawlānā ʿAbdur Rahīm Motalā Ṣāḥib
Chapata, Zambia. (death: 25th Muḥarram 1434 A.H or 9/12/2012)
Kashful Bārī: Ḥazrat Mawlānā Salīmullāh Khān Ṣāḥib (death: Rabīʿuth

Thānī 1438 A.H/ January 2017)
Taqrīrul Bukhārī: Ḥazrat Muftī Nizāmudīn Shāmizī (death: 10th

Rabīʿuth Thānī 1425 A.H.)
320
Imdādul Bārī and it’s abridged version:
Jāmiʿud Darārī: Ḥazrat Mawlānā ʿAbdul Jabār Ṣāḥib Aʿẓmī Maʿrūfi,

Shaykhul Ḥadīth of Shahimuradabad (death: 1409 A.H). It was
completed by Mawlānā Zaynul ʿĀbidīn Maʿrūfi Aʿẓmī (death: 16th
Jumād-al-Thānī 1434 A.H.)
Taʿdīlur Rijālil Bukhārī: Muḥaddith Kabīr, ʿAllāmah Ḥabībur Raḥmān

Aʿẓmī (death: 1412 A.H.) (Replies to objections raised against the
narrators of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī.)
At-Taswībāt Limā Waqaʿ Fī Hawāshil Bukhārī Minat Taṣhīfāt:
Ḥazrat Mawlānā ʿAbdul Jabbār Ṣāḥib Aʿẓmī Mawwī, Shaykhul Ḥadīth of

Maẓāhirul ʿUlūm, Banāras and Mirqātul ʿUlūm, Mau, U.P., India. (death:
1414 A.H.)
Inʿāmul Bārī: Muftī Taqī ʿUthmānī ‫مد ظله‬.
Naṣrul Bārī: Mawlānā Muḥammad Ghanī, Shaykhul Ḥadīth ‫مد ظله‬, Waqf
Maẓāhirul ʿUlūm Sahāranpūr.
Al-Khayrul Jārī: Mawlānā Ṣūfi Muḥammad Sarūr ṣāḥib ‫مد ظله‬, Jāmiʾah
Ashrafiyah Lahore Pakistan.
321
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS CHAIN OF TRANSMISSION (SANAD)
‫بسم هللا الرحمن الرحيم‬
‫والحمد هلل ربِّ العالمين والصلوة والسالم علي سيد األنبياء والمرسلين‬
‫رجال سند الصحيح لألمام البخاري‬
‫مع سني والدتهم وسني وفاتهم وأعمارهم‬
Our Chain of Transmission (Sanad) of Imām Bukhārī’s Ṣaḥīḥ
Inclusive of their Birth and Death Dates and Ages
:‫ فضل الرحمن األعظمى المئوى‬.١
Birth: 14 Ṣafar 1366 A.H./ 7 January 1947 C.E.
Graduated in 1386 A.H. from Miftāḥul ʿUlūm, Mau
The son of Qārī, Muftī, Ḥafīẓur Raḥmān Aʿẓmī v, the Shaykhul Ḥadīth of
Madrasah Mirqātul ʿUlūm, Mau, U.P, India.
Birth: 1345 A.H./1926 C.E.
Graduation: 1367 A.H./1948 C.E. from Miftāḥul ʿUlūm, India
Death: 2nd Shawwāl, 1430 A.H./22 September 2009 C.E. (Tuesday)
Age: 85 years
:v‫ عن المحدث الجليل الشيخ حبيب الرحمن األعظمى‬.۲
Birth: 1319 A.H./1901 C.E.
Death: 10 Ramaḍān 1412 A.H./ 17 March 1992 C.E.
Age: 92
322
:v‫وعن العالمة شيخ عبد اللطيف النعمانى األعظمى‬
Birth: 17 Ramaḍān 1315 A.H./1898 C.E.
Death: 3 Dhul Qaʿdah 1392 A.H./6 January 1973 C.E.
Age: 77
:v‫ كالهما عن الشيخ كريم بخش السنبهلي‬.٣
Birth: 1317 A.H. in Deoband
Death: 1362 A.H.
:v‫عن الشيخ محمود حسن شيخ الهند الديوبندي‬.٤
Birth: 1268 A.H./1851 C.E.
Death: 1339 A.H./1920 C.E.
Age: 71
:v‫ عن الشيخ محمد قاسم النانوتوي‬.۵
Birth: 1248 A.H./1831 C.E.
Death: 1297 A.H./1789 C.E.
Age: 49
:v‫والشيخ رشيد احمد كنكوهي‬
Birth: 1244 A.H./1828 C.E.
Death: 1323 A.H./1905 C.E.
323
‫‪A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS‬‬ ‫)‪CHAIN OF TRANSMISSION (SANAD‬‬
‫‪Age: 79‬‬
‫‪ .٦‬عن الشيخ عبد الغنى المجددى الدهلوى ثم المدنى‪:v‬‬
‫‪Birth: 1235 A.H. in Delhi‬‬
‫‪Death: 1296 A.H. IN Madīnah Munawwarah‬‬
‫‪Age: 61‬‬
‫‪ .۷‬عن شيخ محمد اسحاق ابو سليمان الدهلوى ثم المكى‪:v‬‬
‫‪Birth: 1197 A.H. in Delhi‬‬
‫‪Death: 1262 A.H. in Makkah Mukarramah‬‬
‫‪Age: 65‬‬
‫‪ .۸‬عن الشيخ عبد العزيز المحدث األجل (جدّه أب األم) الدهلوى‪:v‬‬
‫‪Birth: 1159 A.H.‬‬
‫‪Death: 1239 A.H.‬‬
‫‪Age: 80‬‬
‫‪ .۹‬عن الشيخ الشاه ولى هللا بن عبد الرحيم المحدث الدهلوى‪:v‬‬
‫‪Birth: 1114 A.H.‬‬
‫‪Death: 1276 A.H.‬‬
‫‪Age: 62‬‬
‫‪ .۱۰‬عن الشيخ أبي طاهر محمد عبد السميع الكردى المدنى‪:v‬‬
‫‪Birth: 1081 A.H. in Madīnah Munawwarah‬‬
‫‪324‬‬
Death: 1163 A.H. in Madīnah Munawwarah
Age: 62
:v‫ عن والده الشيخ ابراهيم ابن حسن الكردى الكورانى المدنى‬.۱۱
Birth: 1024 A.H. in Kurd
Age: 76
:v‫ عن الشيخ أحمد بن محمد البدري القشاشي المالكي المدني‬.١٢
Birth: 991 A.H.
Age: 80
:v‫ عن الشيخ أحمد بن عبد القدوس الشّناوى المصرى ثم المدنى‬.١٣
Birth: 975 A.H. in Egypt
Age: 53
:v‫ عن الشيخ شمس الدين محمد بن أحمد بن حمزه الرملى المصرى‬.۱٤
Birth: 919 A.H. in Egypt
Death:1004 A.H. in Egypt
Age: 85
:v‫ عن الشيخ اإلسالم زكريا بن محمد األنصاري السنيكي المصري‬.۱۵
325
‫‪Birth: 823 A.H. in Egypt‬‬
‫‪Death: 926 A.H. in Egypt‬‬
‫‪Age: 103‬‬
‫‪ .۱٦‬عن الشيخ أحمد بن حجر العسقالنى القاهرى شارح البخارى‪:v‬‬
‫‪Age: 79‬‬
‫‪ .١٧‬عن الشيخ زين الدين ابراهيم أحمد التنوخي البعلي ثم الشامي ثم المصري‪:v‬‬
‫‪Age: 91‬‬
‫‪ .١٨‬عن الشيخ أبي العباس أحمد بن أبي طالب الحجّار الصالحي‪:v‬‬
‫سمع الزبيدي في‪ ٦٣٠‬ه في جامع الصالحية (َلمع‪)۷١ :‬‬
‫]‪Birth: 622 A.H. in Ḥudūd [Lāmiʿ:71‬‬
‫‪Death: 730 A.H. in Ṣafar‬‬
‫‪Age: 108‬‬
‫‪ .١۹‬عن الشيخ سراج الدين حسين بن مبارك الزبيدي األصل البغدادي‪:v‬‬
‫‪Birth: 544 A.H. or 545 A.H.‬‬
‫‪Death: Ṣafar 631 A.H. in Baghdād‬‬
‫‪326‬‬
‫‪Age: 86‬‬
‫‪ .۲۰‬عن الشيخ عبد األول عيس ٰى بن شعيب السجزي الهروي‪:v‬‬
‫‪Birth: 458 A.H.‬‬
‫‪Death: 553 A.H.‬‬
‫‪Age: 95‬‬
‫‪ .٢١‬عن أبي الحسن الشيخ عبد الرحمن بن مظفر البوشنجي الداؤدي‪:v‬‬
‫‪Birth: 374 A.H.‬‬
‫‪Death: 467 A.H. in Baushanj‬‬
‫‪Age: 93‬‬
‫سرخسي‪:v‬‬
‫عبدَّللا بن أحمد بن حم ُّويه ال َّ‬
‫ٰ‬ ‫‪ .۲۲‬عن الشيخ أبي محمد‬
‫‪Birth: 293 A.H.‬‬
‫)‪Death: 381 A.H. (Lāmiʿ: pg. 71‬‬
‫‪Age: 88‬‬
‫عبدَّللا محمد بن يوسف بن مطر الفربري‪:v‬‬

‫ٰ‬ ‫‪ .۲۳‬عن الشيخ أبي‬
‫‪Birth: 231 A.H.‬‬
‫‪Death: 320 A.H.‬‬
‫‪Age: 89‬‬
‫عبدَّللا محمد بن اسماعيل بن ابراهيم بن المغيرة بن بردزبه‪:v‬‬

‫ٰ‬ ‫‪ .٢۴‬أمير المؤمنين أبي‬
‫‪Birth: 194 A.H.‬‬
‫‪327‬‬
‫‪Death: 256 A.H.‬‬
‫‪Age: 62‬‬
‫رحمهم هللا رحمة واسعة‪ .‬وجزاهم عنا جميع المسلمين خير الجزاء‬
‫‪Second Sanad‬‬
‫سند رسالة األوائل‬
‫فضل الرحمن بن حفيظ الرحمن األعظمي‪ ،‬عن الشيخ المحدث الجليل حبيـب الـرحـمـن األعظمي‪ ،‬عن الشيخ‬
‫أبي األنوار عبد الغفار المئوى‪( 1‬األعظمي) ‪ ،‬عـن الشيخ عبد الحق اَلله آبادي المهاجر المكي‪ ،‬عن الشيخ‬
‫قـطـب الـديـن الـدهلوي ثم المكي ‪ ،‬عن الشيخ محمد اسحاق الدهلوي ثم المكي‪ ،‬عن الشيخ عمر بن عبد‬
‫الكريم بن عبد الرسول ‪ ،‬عن الشيخ محمد طاهر‪ ،‬عن والده العالمة محمد سعيد سنبل المكي صاحب‬
‫الرسالة ‪،‬‬
‫هللا‪2‬‬ ‫وسنده مذكور في الرسالة إلى المؤلفين ‪ .‬رحمهم‬
‫)‪The Third Sanad (The Highest‬‬
‫‪Muḥaddith Jalīl also received ijāzah (authorisation) from Mawlānā‬‬

‫‪ʿAbdur Raḥmān Bhopālī. Who received from Mawlānā ʿAbdul Qayūm‬‬
‫‪Badhānwī. Who received ijāzah from Shāh Muḥammad Isḥāq ṣāḥib,‬‬
‫‪1‬‬ ‫‪Ḥazrat Mawlānā ʿAbdul Ghaffār ṣāḥib v was the student of Ḥazrat Mawlānā‬‬
‫‪Rashīd Aḥmed Gangohī v. He studied the Ṣiḥāḥ Sittah by him in 1305 A.H. and‬‬
‫‪1306 A.H. (For details, see Ḥayāt Abul Ma-āthir Page 118-130) Additionally, in‬‬
‫‪“Tadkhkirar Rashīd”, from among the students of Ḥazrat Gangohī v, his name‬‬
‫)‪is mentioned first. (1/280 New edition published by Deoband‬‬
‫‪ 2‬اجازة المحدث الكبير الشيخ حبيب الرحمن اَلعظمی‪v‬‬
‫الحمد هلل وکفی وسالم على عباده الذين اصطفى ‪ ،‬أما بعد !‬
‫ت له‬ ‫فقد قرأ على هذه الرسالة الولد ُ العزيز الفاضل الذكي فض ُل الرحمن ب ُن حفيظ الرحمن المئوى ‪ ،‬وأجز ُ‬
‫وصيه بتقوى هللاِ في السِّ ِ ِّر والعالنية واتباعِ السنة‬ ‫روايةَ ما تحويه بشروطِ ها ال ُمعتبرةِ عند أه ِل العلم ‪ ،‬وأ ُ ِ‬
‫َّ‬
‫واکرام من بعدهم من العلماء والذبِّ ِ‬‫ِ‬ ‫واحسان َّ‬
‫الظنِِّ بهم واکرامِ هم‬ ‫ِ‬ ‫ب البدع ِة واقتفا ِء آثار السلفِ الصالح‬‫واجتنا ِ‬
‫عنهم ‪ ،‬وأن َل ينسانا في دعواتِه ‪ ،‬وفِّقنا هللا وايِّاه لما يُحبُّه ويرضاه‪.‬‬
‫قاله بفمه وسطره بقلمه حبيب الرحمن األعظمى في رابع شوال من سنة ‪١٣٩٣‬ه‪.‬‬
‫‪328‬‬
who is also the son-in-law of Shāh Ṣāḥib. (Majallah Al-Ma-āthir pg 73,

Muḥarram Rabiʿul Awwal 1416)
This is the highest sanad (chain).
329
Biographies of
The Illustrious Mashāyikh
of Ḥadīth
in Our Sanad
330
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS MAWLĀNĀ NUʿMĀNĪٰ
Ḥazrat Mawlānā Shaykh ʿAbdul Laṭīf Nuʿmānī 1 Mawi Aʿẓmī v
Birth: 1315 A.H.
Death: 1392 A.H.
Age: 77 years
Date of Death: 1392 A.H. ‫( اللهم اغفر له‬May Allāh forgive him.)
Birth
Mawlānā Nuʿmānī was born on 17 Ramaḍān, 1315 A.H. (February

1898) in Imamganj which is near to the province, Mau. His father’s
name was ʿAbdul Ḥafīẓ who was a great Ḥāfiẓ.2
The Beginning of His Studies
He first studied Qurʾān Nāẓirah (recitation of the Qurʾān) in Madrasah

ʿĀliyah, Jamālpūrah, Mau. After completing this, he entered the Dārul
ʿUlūm in Mau. (Taẓkirah Nuʿmānī pg. 25,26)
In 1916, Mawlānā Nuʿmānī v studied a Mullā (B.A.) course. In March

1917, he set the exam. “Kāfiyah” and “Shāfiyah” were on the syllabus of
this programme. In Shawwāl, 1337 A.H. (1919) he went to Dārul ʿUlūm
Deoband. However, he was affected by a sickness connected to the
change of the season. Therefore, he returned home in Muḥarram 1338
A.H. Thereafter, he also went to Deoband in 1339 A.H. However, due to
various reasons he had to leave Deoband and thus, he went to Meendu
(a province in Aligarh). He stayed there for approximately one month.
He then went back to Dārul ʿUlūm Mau. In Meendu, he studied a
1His title was Nuʿmānī due to his connection to Nuʿmān ibn Thābit. He was
very harsh against the ghayr muqallidīn. He rectified many of the ghayr
muqallidīn. He never feared anyone. Rather, everyone feared him. (Fazl)
2Our colleague, Mawlānā Ẓuhayr Ḥasan v wrote this. However, I have some
reservations regarding this. (Fazl)
331
portion of “Jalālayn” from Mawlānā Ḥāfiẓ ʿAbdur Raḥmān ṣāḥib Amruhi

v. Before this, he also studied some lessons of “Jalālayn” from Mawlānā
Ibrāhīm Balyāwī v in Dārul ʿUlūm Mau. (Taẓkirah Nuʿmānī by Mawlānā
Ḥabībur Raḥmān Aʿẓmī v pg. 13)
Graduating & Teaching
Mawlānā ʿAbdul Laṭīf ṣāḥib v graduated from Dārul ʿUlūm Mau in

Shaʿbān 1341 A.H. Mawlānā Karīm Baksh Sanbhalī ṣāḥib v was his
dorah ḥadīth teacher. After graduating, he started teaching there and in
the first year of his teaching he taught “Mībdhī”, “Sharḥ Hidāyatul
Ḥikmah” and “Mīr Zāhid Risālah maʿa ghulām Yaḥyā”. Mawlānā Manẓūr
Nuʿmānī v was also one of the students. He has written: “He taught in
such a manner that it was as though an experienced teacher of manṭiq
and philosophy was teaching.” (Taẓkirah Nuʿmānī pg. 14,34)
This occurred in 1342 A.H. In 1347 A.H., at the time of Miftāḥul ʿUlūm’s
renaissance, Mawlānā Abul Ḥasan ṣāḥib ʿIrāqī employed Mawlānā
Ḥabībur Raḥmān Aʿẓmī in Miftāḥul ʿUlūm. At that time, Mawlānā ʿAbdul
Laṭīf ṣāḥib left Dārul ʿUlūm Mau and was now a teacher in Sanbhul.
When he came to Mau during the ʿĪd-ul-ʿAḍḥā holidays, Mawlānā Aʿẓmī
also employed Mawlānā Nuʿmānī in Miftāḥul ʿUlūm. After a few days,
Mawlānā Ayyūb Ṣāḥib Aʿẓmī was called from Dewrya and was
appointed as the administrator.
It is from this time that Mawlānā Nuʿmānī v offered his services in

teaching. Approximately, in 1371 A.H., when Mawlānā Aʿẓmī v stopped
teaching in Miftāḥul ʿUlūm and began writing books, he became the
head teacher. (Taẓkirah Nuʿmānī pg. 15)
In 1377 A.H., when he became a member of the assembly, he stopped

teaching. He then returned to the position of head teacher and
Shaykhul Ḥadīth in 1381 A.H. and he remained in this position until his
final days. From Shawwāl 1341 A.H. until 1392 A.H., with the exception
332
of five years, he taught for forty-five years. He has thousands of

students and he also later became the principal.
The Excellences of Mawlānā Nuʿmānī
Mawlānā Nuʿmānī v, in the terminology of our Dīnī Madāris, was an

expert, knowledgeable and well-versed teacher in maʿqūlāt (rational
knowledge) and manqūlāt (Prophetic knowledge). He was a prolific
speaker and also very successful in debating. He also had a deep
connection with the national politics. He was also very active in local
politics and the affairs of the city. He was also the chairman of the
board three times and was also the chairman at the time of his death.
He was also a member of the assembly. He used to fulfil the right of
every work. Allāh blessed him with extraordinary abilities and undying
strength to carry out actions. (Taẓkirah: 135 by Mawlānā Manẓūr Nuʿmānī v)
He defeated the leader of Raḍākanīs, Mawlvī Ḥashmat ʿAlī, many times

in debates. He also debated with the Ahl Ḥadīth. Mawlānā Thanāulllāh
Amratsarī used to publish the replies [of Mawlānā Nuʿmānī] to the
objections of the Ahl Ḥadīth in “Al ʿAdl Gho Jaranwala”. (Taẓkirah: pg. 48
by Mawlānā Muḥammad Ayyūb Aʿẓmī v)
Character and Habits
Mawlānā’s character and habits were of a very high calibre. He

interacted with both the common people and those with a higher
position in the same manner. He would walk miles for the work of the
poor and ordinary people. He was very humble amongst the gatherings
of his friends and loved ones. He would never act as though he was
greater and higher in status. Rather, he always presented himself as a
servant. (Taẓkirah)
Iṣlāḥ and Tablīgh (Rectification & Propagation of Islām)
Guiding, rectifying and tablīgh was Ḥazrat’s special focus. By his

inspiring lectures, he accomplished the great work of rectifying the
333
general public. For this (great work of his), the nation will always
remember him. Other than his city, he also went to the suburbs and
outskirts for the purpose of rectifying the Muslims there. Due to his
numerous commitments, he did not travel much. (Taẓkirah Nuʿmānī pg. 29
Maulvī Ẓuhayr Ḥasan Miftāḥīv)
Maʿmūlāt (His Routine)
Ḥazrat v organised his time according to the Sunnah in such a manner

that there was no inconsistency, nor did he mismanage his time. Ḥazrat
v always awoke during the latter part of the night and performed
tahajjud ṣalāh. After that, he recited the Qurʾān. He performed Fajr
ṣalāh with jamāʿah (congregation) and also woke up the children for
Fajr ṣalāh since, he remained in the madrasah during the day and night
towards the end of his life. When it was time for madrasah, he would
become preoccupied in dars and teaching. (Taẓkirah pg. 31)
During his time as chairman, he remained preoccupied with teaching

until 10 o’clock. He then would go to the board and look at the papers.
He examined the work of the workers and he issued commands. He
would complete this at 12 o’clock and then ate lunch. He would then
take an afternoon nap (siesta- qaylūlah). He taught class after Ẓuhr.
After teaching, he would go to examine and attend to the matters of the
board and societies. After Maghrib, he taught class. After ʿIshāʿ he
busied himself in studying books. (Taẓkirah Nuʿmānī: by Mawlānā Muḥammad
Ayyūb Aʿẓmī v, pg. 49,50)
Death
On 6 January 1973, after ʿIshāʾ while he was busy with writing books,
he suffered from his first heart attack suddenly around 10:30 and in
10-15 minutes this wayfarer departed to his permanent abode. (To
Allāh we belong and to Him do we return .) This was the 1st night of
Dhul Ḥijjah, 1392. Around forty to fifty thousand Muslims attended his
334
janāzah. He was buried in the madrasah. (Extracted from Taẓkirah Nuʿmānī -

Mawlānā Muftī Ẓafīr-ud-Dīn Miftāḥī v)3
3 We also studied “Mīr Quṭbī” and “Baydhāwī” by him. He did not have the
book. We took our books with us. When the students would read the ʿibārah
(text), that would be his muṭālaʿah. He would then raise his head and begin to
lecture. He would rarely look into the book. He would teach like how a person
reads the newspaper. He did not need to do muṭālaʿah and he would say:
“During my student days, until I do not complete doing muṭālaʿah of all the
kitābs at night, I will not eat food.” He would complete all his work and then
eat because laziness overcomes a person after eating. He would mention:
“With regards to teaching, we are mujtahids, i.e., we are mujtahids in our
teaching style. We are not muqallids of anyone with regards to that.” It was his
habit to repeat important points two or three times. If the student is
intelligent, focused and listens attentively, then after class, he remembers all
the topics taught.
He defeated the Radhākhānī’s leader, Maulvī Ḥashmat ʿAlī, many times in

debates. It is the habit of Barelwis to label Gangohī, Nanotvī and Thānvī as
kāfirs (disbelievers). These people have the treasure of kufr on their side.
Now, the work of our Maulvī is to establish that these mashāyikh are Muslims.
He states: We thought that why should we be foolish and simply show our
innocence whenever they accuse us? Therefore, I changed the method of
debating. I quoted the ʿibārah (text) from Maulvī Radhā Khan’s book and then
made an announcement that I have a proclamation to make, “Listen! Your
Maulvī Aḥmad Radhā Khan is a kāfir.” Until now, they had never heard this.
They were astonished. “How can you label him a kāfir? It is your Deoband
fatwā that we do not grade anyone as kāfirs.” He [Mawlānā Nuʿmānī] then
mentions that: “The Ulama of Deoband may not be aware. I have found out. I
have the texts from which I have read and establish his kufr (disbelief). Now,
you establish his Islām. Let the Deoband fatwā remain here.” When he
adopted this style, they were not ready to take this line of debate. Under the
pretext of urinating, they left the scene and did not return thereafter.
A priest came and he went to various places in India and called the Muslims to
Christianity. He read the Qurʾān and used it as evidence against the Muslims.
Once he came and translated so Mawlānā said: “What is the bāb of this word?
What is the ṣegah (inflection) of this word? What is the māddah (root) of this
word, etc.? He only knew the translation and knew nothing else. He became
silent and ran away. He said: “Debate is that which silences the opposition.
What does the layman know regarding discussions about knowledge?”
335
336
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS ʿALLĀMAH AʿẒMĪ
Muḥaddith Kabīr ʿAllāmah Jalīl Mawlānā Ḥabīb-ur- Raḥmān Aʿẓmī v
Amīrul Hind
The Great Mawlānā
Birth: 1319 A.H. /1901 C.E. Death: Ramaḍān 1412 A.H./1992 C.E.
The aforementioned was born in 1319 A.H./1901 C.E. in Maunath

Bhanjan1 in the district of Azamgarh. He acquired his early education
from the scholars of his area. His father, Mawlānā Muḥammad Ṣābir
ṣāḥib v (death:1365 A.H.) was a murīd (disciple) of Ḥazrat Thānwī v.
He was an ascetic, a man of taqwā (Allāh consciousness), good
character, hospitable and performed tahajjud regularly. He recited the
Qurʾān in abundance. He taught children in the masjid of the locality for
Allāh’s sake for approximately twenty-six (26) years. Mawlānā Aʿẓmī v
prospered in the field of knowledge under the shadow of such a father
for forty-six years. He obtained most of his knowledge from Mawlānā
ʿAbdul Ghaffār ṣāḥib v who was the special student of Ḥazrat Gangohī
v. He studied all the books regarding adab (literature) and also books
in other fields by him. In the end, he also studied Tirmidhī Sharīf by him.
Mawlānā ʿAbdul Ghaffār ṣāḥib v passed away in 1341 A.H. He was one
of the great ʿulamāʾ of Mau. He was also a teacher in Gorakhpur and
Maẓharul ʿUlūm, Varanasi. Mawlānā Aʿẓmī v also went to those places
to seek knowledge. In 1918 C.E., he set the Mullā (B.A.) exam. In March
1919 C.E., he set the fāḍil examination and attained a high level of
success.
In Dārul ʿUlūm Deoband
1 Maunath Bhanjan is the biggest province in Azamgarh. It has now become a

separate district. In this town, there are now more than three hundred
masājid and there are seven Dārul ʿUlūms. There are also educational
institutions for girls. [Extracted from Ifādātush Shaykh]
337
He first entered Dārul ʿUlūm Deoband in Shawwāl 1337 A.H. (July 1919
C.E.). He scored marks with distinction in the entrance examination.
During his studies, there was a malaria outbreak. He was also afflicted
by it. Thus, he returned home during the end of Ṣafar.
Teacher in Maẓharul ʿUlūm, Varanasi
He taught in Maẓharul ʿUlūm, Varanasi from Jumād-al-ʾŪlā 1338 A.H.

(February 1920 C.E.).
Returning to Deoband
He re-entered Dārul ʿUlūm in Shawwāl 1339 A.H. (June 1921 C.E.) and
joined the dorah ḥadīth class. He studied Tirmidhī Sharīf by ʿAllāmah
Anwar Shāh Kashmirī v2 and benefitted from him greatly. He studied
Muslim Sharīf from ʿAllāmah Shabīr Aḥmad ʿUthmānī v and he studied
Abū Dāwūd Sharīf by Miyā Aṣghar Ḥusain ṣāḥib v. He used to praise
ʿAllāmah Anwar Shāh Kashmirī v profusely.
He became afflicted with the fever during this year as well.

Additionally, due to the nationalist and independence movements,
riots were also occurring during that year. It is for this reason that he
returned home in Rabīʿ-ul-Awwal 1340 A.H. due to his father’s
command to do so.
Completion of Dorah Ḥadīth in Dārul ʿUlūm Mau
After recovering from his illness, he entered Dārul ʿUlūm Mau. Until
then, Ḥazrat Shaykhul Hind’s v student, Mawlānā Karīm Baksh
Sanbhalī v came to Dārul ʿUlūm and only one student, Mawlānā Abul
2Perhaps, he also studied Bukhārī Sharīf by him because Ḥazrat Kashmīrī v

also taught Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī. (Fazl)
Shāh Ṣāḥib remained as Shaykhul Hind’s deputy in Dārul ʿUlūm Deoband from
1334 A.H. until 1345 A.H. (Tārīkh Dārul ʿUlum Deoband by Sayyid Maḥbūb Raḍwī
2/202) (Fazl)
338
Majīd ṣāḥib, was studying dorah ḥadīth by him. He graduated with him
in Shaʿbān 1340 A.H. (April 1922 C.E.). He studied the Ṣiḥāḥ Sittah by
Mawlānā Karīm Baksh ṣāḥib v. After studying dorah ḥadīth, he also
studied some subjects in the field of maʿqūlāt (Shamse bāzighah etc.)
by Mawlānā Karīm Baksh ṣāḥib v.
As a Teacher in Dārul ʿUlūm Mau
He became a teacher from Shawwāl 1340 A.H. in Dārul ʿUlūm and he

taught advanced books. During this time, Mawlānā Maḥmūd Manẓūr
Nuʿmānī v studied many books by him. Mawlānā Muḥammad Ḥusayn
Bihārī, the late ustādh of Dārul ʿUlūm Deoband, Ḥazrat Mawlānā ʿAbdul
Jabbār Ṣāḥib Aʿẓmī and many other famous ʿulamāʾ also studied by him
at that time.
Head Teacher in Maẓharul ʿUlūm
Due to some reason, he left Dārul ʿUlūm Mau and he accepted the post
of head teacher in Madrasah Maẓharul ʿUlūm Varanasi in 1343 A.H. He
remained there until 1347 A.H.
In Miftāḥul ʿUlūm Mau
In Shawwāl 1347 A.H. (1929 C.E.), he was appointed (by persistence)

as the Shaykhul Ḥadīth and head teacher of Miftāḥul ʿUlūm, Mau. It is
from here that the renaissance of Miftāḥul ʿUlūm was born. It formed
into a jāmiʿah (educational institution) very rapidly and it became
famous across the world.
He remained as the Shaykhul Ḥadīth there from 1347 A.H. until 1369
A.H. Usually, he taught Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī and Jāmiʿ Tirmidhī and Mawlānā
ʿAbdul Laṭīf Ṣāḥib Nuʿmānī v taught Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim and Sunan Abū
Dāwūd. He chose to resign from teaching in 1369 A.H. due to his
writing and research commitments. He only remained as a member
and a patron of the shūrā (consultation). In some years, he would also
teach some portions of Bukhārī Sharīf. Sometimes, he would also teach
339
other books but without taking a wage. [We studied some parts of
Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī by Ḥazrat in this manner. Dars (Class) would take place
in the masjid of Ḥazrat’s locality. (Fazl)]
Administration of Miftāḥul ʿUlūm Mau
In 1366 A.H., the responsibility of the administration of the madrasah

was also entrusted to him. He offered his services in this area until
1371 A.H. During this period, he gave special attention to the structure
and building of the madrasah and built many rooms.
Member of the Assembly
In 1952 C.E., by the insistence of Jawāhir Lāl he became a candidate for

the U.P. Assembly, and he became very successful although he did not
go anywhere from his chosen circle for even a minute. He remained as
a member until 1957 A.H. It is for this reason that he had to stay in
Lucknow. During that period, he taught Bukhārī Sharīf in Nadwatul
ʿUlamāʾ, Lucknow. He also taught in Dārul Muballighīn, Lucknow for a
few days. He had a very deep and close connection with Mawlānā
ʿAbdush Shakūr Lucknawi v.
Connection with Jamiʿatul ʿUlamā-e-Hind and the Consultation of

Dārul ʿUlūm Deoband
From 1953 C.E., he was appointed as the head of the working

committee of Jamʿiatul ʿUlamā-e-Hind and also of the majlis shūrā of
Dārul ʿUlūm Deoband. He remained in this position until the end of his
life. Most of the time, the majlis shūrā was conducted under his
chairmanship and his opinion was highly considered. He used to attend
the conferences and gatherings of Jamiʿatul ʿUlamāʾ regularly.
Rather, on one occasion, Ḥazrat Mawlānā Ḥusayn Aḥmad Madanī v

decided that whenever a fiqhī matter was presented to the working
committee, a verdict would not be passed without consulting
Muḥaddith Jalīl Ḥazrat Mawlānā Ḥabīb-ur-Raḥmān Aʿẓmī v. This plan
340
was unanimously accepted by all the administrators of the majlis at a

time when Mawlānā Aʿẓmī was not even present in that gathering. [See
Ḥayāt Abul Ma-āthir pg. 198 for details.]
In 1945 C.E., Ḥazrat Shaykhul Islām Mawlānā Ḥusayn Aḥmad Madnī v

and the principal of Dārūl ʿUlūm Deoband, Qārī Muḥammad Ṭayyib
ṣāḥib v, came to Mau from Deoband and offered Mawlānā Aʿẓmī v the
opportunity to be the head of the Iftāʾ department. However, the
people of Mau were not pleased with this (i.e., that he leaves Mau).
Therefore, he excused himself. After the death of ʿAllāmah Ibrāhīm
Balyawi v he was also offered the post of the head of teaching at Dārul
ʿUlūm. However, he also excused himself.
Returning to Miftāḥul ʿUlūm
When Mawlānā ʿAbdul Laṭīf Nuʿmānī v, the principal and head of

studies of Miftāḥul ʿUlūm, passed away in Dhul Ḥijjah 1392 A.H.
(January 1973 C.E.), he was once again appointed as head lecturer and
Shaykhul Ḥadīth of Miftāḥul ʿUlūm. He offered his services for a few
years at Miftāḥul ʿUlūm for the sake of Allāh. He then separated from
Jāmiʿah due to a few reasons.
The Establishment of ‫ المعهد العالي‬and Mirqātul ʿUlūm
After leaving Miftāḥul ʿUlūm, he established an organisation by the

name, “‫”المعهد العالي للدراسات العليا‬. The purpose of this organisation was to
make the fuḍalāʾ of the madrasah, experts in Ḥadīth and fiqh. However,
due to not finding the students who met his requirements, he
established Madrasah Mirqātul ʿUlūm where he made arrangements
for teaching from the beginning years. Until the end of his life, he
remained as the principal and was responsible for this organisation. He
also taught Dorah ḥadīth for a few years and within the premises of
this organisation, he was buried.
341
Imārat-e-Hind [Influential & Leadership Position in India]
In 28 Ṣafar, 1407 A.H. (2ND November 1986 C.E.), he was appointed as

the Amīrul Hind and Amīr Sharʿīah by consensus in a public gathering
for Indian nationals in New Delhi. He remained in this post until the
end of his life.
Other Excellences:
He was a very great debater. There were many occasions where he

succeeded and won debates against Raḍā Khānī and the ghayr
muqallidīn ʿulamāʾ. In the district of Adri in Mau, on the 24th, 25th and
26th of Jumād-al-ʾUkhrā, 1352 A.H. (15,16,17 October 1933 C.E.),
Mawlānā Ḥabībur Raḥmān Aʿẓmī, Mawlānā ʿAbdul Laṭīf Nuʿmānī and
Mawlānā Muḥammad Manẓūr Nuʿmānī ‫ رحمهم هللا‬debated against Maulvī
Ḥashmat ʿAlī and Maulvī Naʿīm-ud-Dīn. After being defeated, the Raḍā
Khānī ʿulamāʾ left secretly.
He had a very strong memory. He knew books by heart. Studying books

was his passion. He acquired tremendous benefit from the libraries of
the cities he travelled to. His memory was so proficient that he could
reference the page numbers and lines of books which he read a long
time ago.
Once, he himself said: “You all do not have enthusiasm. I thought, let
me see how many Arabic poems I know. So, from my memory, I wrote
five hundred poems from those that ended with the letter alif. Then I
thought, what if pride enters my heart [due to this]. So, I stopped
writing from memory.”
Once, a poet recited his poem in a poetry reading which took place in
Mau. After his performance ended, he called Mawlānā Aʿẓmī and said:
“Recite the poems which you heard from me.” ʿAllāmah v recited the
entire poem, word for word. The poet said: “Ok, brother! Today, I bear
342
witness to your strong memory. Allāh l has blessed you with a great
bounty.” (For details, see Ḥayāt Abul Ma-āthir pg. 472)
He was a great mufassir, muḥaddith, faqīh, speaker, debater, preacher,

adviser, orator, writer, poet, historian, researcher, teacher, author and
an exceptional scholar with regards to asmāʾ-e-rijāl. During his
teaching career and even after, he dedicated his time to writing and
compiling. The government of India awarded him for his services in
writing and he was also given an honorary award.
Some Impressions (Taʾathurāt) of the Famous ʿUlamāʾ Kirām
Ḥakīmul Ummah, Ḥazrat Thānwī v praised and described “Al-

Tanqīdus-Sadīd ʿalat Tafsīril Jadīd” in the following manner:
“This lowly, most unworthy slave, Ashraf ʿAlī Thānwī (may he be

pardoned) read each word of this critical article with great interest and
enthusiasm and found it to be the miṣdāq (substantiation) of the
following Ḥadīth. The Messenger of Allāh n said:
.‫يف ْالغَالِينَ َوا ْنتِ َحا َل الْ ُمبْطِ لِينَ َوت َأ ْ ِوي َل ْال َجاهِلين‬ ُ ٍ‫يَحْ مِ ُل َهذَا ْالعِلْ َم مِ ْن ُك ِِّل َخلَف‬
َ َ‫عدُولُهُ يَ ْنفُون‬
ِ ‫ع ْنهُ ت‬
َ ‫َحْر‬
“In each successive generation those who are reliable authorities will
preserve this knowledge, rejecting the alterations made by the
extremists, the plagiarisms of those who make false claims for
themselves and the interpretations of the ignorant .”” (Mishkāt from
Bayhaqī) (Mishkāt pg. 36 Kitāb ul ʿIlm, Chapter two)
Ḥazrat completed compiling the book, “Al-Ḥāwī lirijāliṭ Ṭaḥāwī” which

comprises of the narrators of “Sharḥ Maʿānī Al-Āthār” and “Sharḥ
Mushkil Al-Āthār” in Jumād-al-ʿŪlā 1348 A.H. as Ḥazrat mentions at the
end of this book.
" ‫ " انه وهللا تصنيف شريف‬was extracted from the number 1348 (which was
the year in which Ḥazrat completed this compilation). This is the
amazing work of ʿAllāmah Aʿẓmī for which there is no other equivalent.
This is because many scholars have worked on the narrators of “Sharḥ
343
Maʿānī Al-Āthār”. However, the work he has done on “Sharḥ Mushkil

Al-Āthār” is unparalleled, unique and special to him. The fact that the
giant scholars in this field such as ʿAllāmah Anwar Shāh Kashmīrī v and
ʿAllāmah Shabbir Aḥmed ʿUthmānī v have praised and approved of this
book is sufficient to prove the value of “Al-Ḥāwī”. Ḥazrat was only
twenty-nine (29) years old when he wrote this book. (Ḥayāt Abul Ma-āthir
178)
Shaykhul Azhar, Dr. ʿAbdul Ḥalīm Maḥmūd v addressed Mawlānā

Manẓūr Nuʿmānī v and Mawlānā ʿAlī Miyān v and said: “I testify that if
anyone in the world deserves the title of “‫ث اعظم‬ ِ ‫“ – ”محد‬The Great
Muḥaddith”, it is this person.” And he said in Dabhel:
“‫”بل انه أكبر علماء العالم اإلسالمي‬- “Rather, he is the greatest scholar in the
Islāmic world.” (See Ḥayāt Abul Ma-āthir 1/364,572)
The most important and valuable work of Shaykh Aḥmad Shākir is the
research and commentary of “Musnad Imām Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal”. Thus,
great effort was made to publish this book. It is published in sixteen
volumes. During the research and publication of this book, in its third
volume in Shawwāl 1366 A.H., he published a notice which addressed
the scholars from all over the world. He requested them to send him
any errors, objections, feedback or suggestions they have. After
publishing this notice Shaykh Aḥmed Muḥammad Shākir v waited for
eight or nine years. Finally, after nine years a letter reached him. Read
the details of this in the words of Shaykh Aḥmed Shākir v himself:
‫ وقد عرفت من كتابه‬.‫ ولن يكن لي شرف معرفته من قبل‬،‫” ثم جاءني كتاب من أخ عالم كريم‬
‫ وطواه على‬،‫هج‬١٣٧٥ ‫ ذى القعدة‬/٢٦ ‫ وكتابه هذا مؤرخ‬.‫فضله وعلمه وتحققه بالبحث الدقيق‬
‫ هو األستاذ حبيب‬:‫ وهذا األخ العالمة‬،‫ منالجزء األول إلى جزء الثامن‬،‫استدراكات وتعقبات دقيقة‬
“.‫الرحمن األعظمي‬
“Then I received a letter from a noble, knowledgeable brother. I did not

have the honour of knowing him from before. From his letter, I became
aware of his virtue, his knowledge, and his ability to conduct thorough
research. This letter is dated 26 Dhul Qaʾdah 1375 A.H. It consisted of
344
deep and precise suggestions and corrections from the first eight
volumes. This extremely knowledgeable brother is the ustādh, Ḥabībur
Raḥmān Al-Aʿẓmī.”
Shaykh Aḥmad Muḥammad Shākir v published these corrections of

ʿAllāmah Aʿẓmī v in the fifteenth volume of “Musnad Aḥmad”, which is
spread over fifty pages. Along with this, bear in mind that these
corrections were only for eight volumes of “Musnad Aḥmad”. One can
gauge the extent to which he was impressed by the research and
scholarly work of ʿAllāmah Aʿẓmī by a letter written by Shaykh Aḥmad
Muḥammad Shākir to ʿAllāmah Aʿẓmī after reading his corrections:
‫جاءني كتابكم األول‬....‫حضرة األخ العالمة الكبير المحقق األستاذ حبيب الرحمن األعظمي‬
‫وأشكركم خالص الشكر على‬،...‫ أما استدراكاتكم فكلها نفيسة عالية وَل أقول هذا مجاملة‬....‫النفيس‬
‫ وأنتم‬،‫ وأرجو أن تزيدوني من إشاراتكم وإرشاداتكم خدمة للسنة النبوية المطهرة‬،‫هذه العناية الجيدة‬
‫ثم أكرر‬،...‫ من أعظم العلماء بها في هذا العصر فالحمد هلل على توفيقكم‬،‫كما رأيت من عملكم‬
‫ (حيات ص‬.‫الرجاء أن َل تحرموني من آراءكم النيرة وتحقيقاتكم النفيسة حفظكم هللا وبارك فيكم‬
)٥٧٧
“Respected Brother, the great scholar and researcher, the teacher

Ḥabībur Raḥmān Aʿẓmī... I received your precious letter ..... As for your
corrections, they are all very valuable, and I am not saying this out of
humility ....... and I thank you sincerely for this great gift. And I hope
that you will continue to support and help me with your suggestions
and statements in the service of the purified Sunnah of the Prophet n.
And you, as I have observed from your work, are from amongst the
greatest scholars in this era. Praise be to Allāh for your success............ I
reiterate that I hope that you do not deprive me of your opinions and
your valuable research. May Allāh protect you and bless you.” (Ḥayāt
Abul Maāthir pg. 577)
When “Naṣbur Rāyah” was published by Majlis ʿIlmī Dabhel, Shaykh

ʿAllāmah Muḥammad Zāhid Kawtharī v added ʿAllāmah Qāsim ibn
Quṭlūbghā’s takrīj of “Hidāyah” titled, “Munyatul ʿAlmaʿī” in the
beginning of the fourth volume.
345
ʿAllāmah ʿAẓmī v noted a portion of ʿAllāmah Qāsim ibn Quṭlūbghā’s v

takhrīj from a handwritten manuscript of Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar’s v book
“Dirāȳah” and sent it from Mau. Originally, this is ʿAllāmah Qasim’s
additions to “Dirāȳah”.
After receiving this, ʿAllāmah Kawtharī v in his introduction on

“Munyatul Almaʿī” which was written in Ramaḍān 1369 A.H.,
mentioned ʿAllāmah Aʿẓmī in the following words:
“The Mawlānā, the ʿAllāmah, the skilled, the genius, the erudite, the
expert, Abul Ma-āthir, Ḥabībur Raḥmān Aʿẓmī.” (Munyatul Almaʿī 5)
In another place, while thanking ʿAllāmah Aʿẓmī, he writes:
‫” هذا وإني أشكر موَلنا العالمة النحرير والجهبذ الخبير أبالمآثر حبيب الرحمن األعظمي السالف‬
‫الذكر على تفضله بكتابة التعلي قات بخط يده المباركة ومبادرته بإرسالها الى هذالعاجز مع ما له من‬
“.‫األشغال الكثيرة فإنه هو السبب األوحد لنشر اَلثنين معا‬
“This and I thank Mawlānā, the ʿAllāmah, the skilled, the great, the
genius, the erudite, the expert, Abul Ma-āthir, Ḥabībur Raḥmān Aʿẓmī,
the aforementioned, for taking the initiative to write his comments
with his blessed hand and for taking the initiative to send them to this
helpless, unworthy one despite his busy schedule. This is the only
reason we were able to publish both together.”
While in this state of happiness, he also supplicated abundantly for

ʿAllāmah Aʿẓmī:
‫”فأدعو هللا سبحانه أن يطيل بقاء األستاذ الجليل المشار إليه في خير وعافية ويمتع المسلمين بعلومه‬
)٥۷١ ‫“ (حيات‬.‫ ويكافئه مكافاة المحسنين إزاء هذا الفضل الجسيم‬،‫النافعة‬
“So, I pray to Allāh, Glory be to Him, to prolong the life of the

aforementioned esteemed teacher with goodness and ʿāfiyah, and may
the Muslims gain benefit from his beneficial knowledge, and give him a
great reward, the reward of the muḥsinīn in return of this great favour
of his.” (Ḥayāt Abul Ma-āthir pg. 571)
346
See “Ḥayāt Abul Ma-āthir” for the perceptions/impressions of Shaykh

ʿAbdul Fattāḥ Abū Ghuddah, Shaykh ʿAbdullāh ibn Bāz, Shaykh Shuʿayb
Arnāwuṭ, Shaykh al-Albānī and Shaykh-ul-Ḥadīth Mawlānā Muḥammad
Zakariyyā ‫رحمهم هللا‬.
Many of the drafts of his works could not be published due to being old
and eaten by worms. Many of his first drafts are preserved and effort is
being made to publish them. For this purpose, a quarterly magazine
has been issued under the name “Al-Ma-āthir”.
Bayʿah (Pledge of Allegiance) and Khilāfah
He had pledged allegiance to Ḥazrat Thānwī v while he was a student

and Qārī Munīruddīn ṣāḥib, a caliph of Ḥazrat Ḥājī Imdādullāh Muhājir
Makkī, also gave him permission and caliphate. Mawlānā Aʿẓmī v used
to take the pledge of allegiance from many people. Many people in
Malegaon and Nāgpūr did bayʿah with him. (Tarjumān-ul-Islām Special
Edition pg. 233)
Mawlānā Waṣīullāh Fataḥpūrī v also authorised Ḥazrat.
Published Compilations
1. Nuṣratul Ḥadīth
2. Rakʿāh Tarāwīḥ
3. Rakʿāh Tarāwīḥ Madhayl Bard Anwārul Maṣābīḥ
4. Aʿalāme Marfūʿah
5. Azhār Marbūʿah biradde Āthār Maṭbūʿah in 2 volumes.
6. Aʿyānul Ḥujjāh in 2 volumes
7. Shāriʿ Ḥaqīqī
8. Aḥkāmun Nadhr liawliyāʾullāh wa tafsīr mā uhl bihi lighayrillāh
9. Taḥqīq Ahl ul Ḥadīth
10. Dafʿul Mujādilah an āyātil Mubāhilah
11. Irshād uth Thaqalayn fi Jawābi Ittiḥād ul Mirfaqayn
12. At Tanqīd us Sadīd ʿalā Tafsīril Jadīd
13. Tanbīhul Kādhibīn
347
14. Ibṭāl ʿAzādārī

15. Taʿziyah Dārī Sunnī Nuqṭā Naẓr Se
16. Riḥbar Ḥujjāj wa Dalīl ul Ḥujjāj
17. Ahl dil ki dil Āwez Bāten
18. Dast Kār Ahl Sharf
19. Al-Albānī shudhu-dhuhu wa akhṭāuhu
20. Taʿqibāt ʿAlā Taʿlīqāt Aḥmed Muḥammad Shākir
21. Taʿdīl Rijāl Bukhārī
Edited Books
Ḥazrat v has published many rare books after editing and penning
footnotes for them which is a very great and important task and
responsibility. Sometimes doing this is more difficult than compiling a
separate, new book. These books are as follows:
1. Intiqāʾ ut Targhīb wat Tarhīb by Ibn Ḥajar

2. Musnad Ḥumaydī in two (2) volumes
3. Kitāb uz Zuhd war Raqāʾiq by Ibnul Mubārak
4. Sunan Saʿīd ibn Manṣūr in two (2) volumes
5. Al Maṭālabul ʿĀliyyah by Ibn Ḥajar in four (4) volumes
6. Talkhīṣ Khawātim Jāmiʿul Uṣūl by Muḥammad Ṭahir Patnī
7. Muṣannaf ʿAbdur Razzāq in eleven (11) volumes
8. Majmaʿ Biḥār ul Anwār by Muḥammad Ṭahir Patnī
9. Kashful Astār ʿan Zawāʾid Musnad Bazzār in four (4) volumes
10. Muṣannaf Ibn Abī Shaybah (Only four volumes have been
published. Work has been done on most of the parts.)
11. Taḥqīq Ḥayātuṣ Ṣaḥābah
12. Fatḥul Mughīth by Sakhāwī
13. Takmīlul Idh-hān Mawlānā Shāh Rafīʿud Dīn
14. Risālatul Awāʾil by Shaykh Muḥammad Saʾīd Sunbhul
Unpublished Compilations
1. Al-Ḥāwī lirijāliṭ Ṭaḥāwī
2. Al-Itḥāf-us-saniyah bidhikri Muḥaddithil Ḥanafiyyah
348
3. Rad Taḥqīqul Kalām

4. Many fatāwā
5. ʿAẓmate Ṣaḥābah
6. Kitābuth Thiqāt by Ibn Shāhīn
7. Al Ḥujajul Qawiyyah
8. As-Sayrul Ḥathīth
9. Al Tawṣiyah bi isrārit Tasmiyah (Arabic)
10. Ḥadrul Lithām ʿan wajhil Qirāʾat Khalfal Imām
11. Muʿjizāt wa Karāmāt
12. Islām aur Ṣinf Nāzuk
13. Kashf ul Muʿaḍalāt fi raddi ḥallil Mughllaqāt
14. Al Qawl-ul-Mukhtār fī tazayyī bi ziyyil kuffār
15. Al Rawḍ-ul-Majūd fī taqdīmir rukbatayn ʿindas sujūd
16. Tawṭīn-ul Jāʾishāh bi Sharḥil bināʾ bi ʿĀʾishāh
17. Tadhkirah Udabāʾ-il-Hind (Arabic)
Travels
In 1950 A.H., Ḥazrat v had the honor of visiting the Ḥaramayn

Sharīfayn for the first time. He was thereafter fortunate to visit again
and again. When he travelled to Beirut during the publishing of
“Muṣannaf ʿAbdur Razzāq”, along with his travel for ḥajj and ziyārah,
he also visited Damascus, Sidon, Baalbek (Baʿlabakka), Latakia, and
other cities of Syria. He also travelled to Baḥrayn. All these trips were
filled with ʿilmī benefits. The companions who accompanied him on his
journey narrate such events from which it becomes known that
Ḥazrat’s remarkable intellectual ability was manifested everywhere.
Students
It is difficult to count the students of Muḥaddith Jalīl. Many great

scholars used to also benefit from Ḥazrat through letters and also
through direct conversations. It is also difficult to count those who
studied officially with Ḥazrat in madāris. Many Arab Shuyūkh would go
to India or while travelling, studied Ḥadīth books by Ḥazrat and
349
obtained ijāzah from him. Mawlānā Muḥammad ʿUthmān Maʿrūfī ṣāḥib

v has recorded their names in his treatise.
Death: On 10th Ramaḍān 1412 A.H. (Saturday 17th March 1992)3 at the
time of ifṭār (from this angle, one can also say 11th of Ramaḍān) this
sun of knowledge and research set forever and his soul was buried in
the land of Mirqāt-ul-ʿUlūm. An estimated two hundred thousand
(200,000) Muslims attended the janāzah (funeral prayer) in the state
of fasting. The janāzah took place on the railway field outside the city.
(This information is extracted from Mawlānā Muḥammad ʿUthmān Maʿrūfī’s article in

Nadāʾe Shāhī June 1992 edition and the July 1992-December 1992 special edition of
Tarjumānul Islām Banaras. For details, refer to “Tarjumānul Islām”.)
(Ḥazrat's biography has been published in two large volumes under the title of “Ḥayāt
Abul Ma-āthir” by Mawlānā Dr. Masʿūd Aʿẓmī ‫مد ظله‬.)
A Story
Mawlānā Yunus ibn Qārī said: “In the fourth year, I took a jamāʿah to
Dholiah (Maharastra). It became known that Raʾīs-ul-Muḥaddithīn
Ḥazrat Mawlānā Ḥabīb-ur-Raḥmān ṣāḥib had arrived. So, I went by
Mawlānā and inquired about his health. He said that he had undergone
an abdominal operation and there is still weakness. The doctors
forbade him to read and write. However, it was not possible for him
not to write or read or say anything. Tomorrow in Malegaon….”
Footnotes have also been written along with the book. (Sawāniḥ Mawlānā
Aḥmadullāh Rāndīrī v pg. 29)
3Date of Death: ‫( هو أهل التقوى وأهل المغفرة‬He is from among the people of taqwā
and the forgiven ones.)1992 CE. (Ḥayāt Abul Ma-āthir page 723) (Fazl)
350
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS MAWLĀNĀ KARĪM BAKSH
Ḥazrat Mawlānā Karīm Baksh Sanbhalī v
He graduated from Dārul ʿUlūm Deoband in 1317 A.H. Death: 1362

A.H.
(Mashāhīr ʿUlamāʾ Dārul ʿUlūm Deoband, Muftī Ẓufīr-ud-Dīn Ṣāḥib v pg. 57)
The detailed biography of Mawlānā Karīm Baksh Sanbhalī v remains

unknown. What is known is that he studied the books until the middle
years in his hometown, Sanbhal, and then left for Amruhah. Here, he
learnt a few lessons by Mawlānā Aḥmad Ḥasan v. Then, he entered
Dārul ʿUlūm Deoband and completed dorah ḥadīth in 1317 A.H. by
Shaykhul Hind v. He was a very proficient scholar. He remained a
teacher in various madāris. While he was a teacher in Hāpūr, Mawlānā
Sayyed Fakhrud Dīn Aḥmad v, who later became the Shaykhul Ḥadīth
in Shāhi Muradabad and Deoband, was also taught by him. He
remained the head teacher in Jāmiʿul ʿUlūm in Kānpūr. Then, he was
appointed as the head teacher of Dārūl ʿUlūm, Mau Azamgharh. During
that time, Mawlānā Ḥabīb-ur-Raḥmān Aʿẓmī v, Mawlānā ʿAbdul Laṭīf
Nuʿmānī Aʿẓmī v and Mawlānā Muḥammad Manẓūr Nuʿmānī v learnt
some Ḥadīth books by him. He passed away in 1362 or 1361 A.H (Ḥayāt
Abul Ma-āthir pg. 167 & Tārīkh Dārul ʿUlūm Deoband-Sayyid Maḥbūb Riḍwī 2/85)
He came to Mau to serve as the Shaykhul Ḥadīth and head teacher of

Dārul ʿUlūm Mau. Our teachers, Mawlānā Ḥabībur Raḥmān Aʿẓmī v,
Mawlānā ʿAbdul Laṭīf Nuʿmānī v and Mawlānā Shams-ud-Dīn ṣāḥib
Maui v studied dorah ḥadīth by him.
I heard Mawlānā Shams-ud-Dīn ṣāḥib v 1 saying: “We were not

enraptured on the first day he taught. This was because there was no
1 This teacher of ours studied some books with Mawlānā Aʿẓmī v. He

graduated one year after him in 1341 A.H. He passed away in 1392 A.H. He
remained as a teacher and deputy administrator in Miftāḥul ʿUlūm ‫رحمه هللا الواسعة‬
‫ رحمة‬May Allāh’s mercy be upon Him; His vast and endless mercies. (See Ḥayāt
Abul Ma-āthir pg. 167,662) (Fazl)
351
lantern at night for him to do muṭālaʿah. The next day, when he

obtained a lantern, his expertise was exhibited, and I realised that he
was a very proficient and note-worthy scholar.”
I heard Mawlānā ʿAbdul Laṭīf Nuʿmānī v saying: “He gave details

regarding fiqhī rulings only for Jāmiʿ Tirmidhī. In Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī (’s
class), he only spoke regarding the specialities of that book. Thus, we
would read many pages of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī every day.”
From this, it becomes known that his teaching style was like that of
Ḥazrat Shaykhul Hind v. Ḥazrat Shaykhul Hind’s lectures were brief
but comprehensive. This fact is apparent form the publication of his
Jāmiʿ Tirmidhī lectures, and we also heard this from our teachers.
Lengthy lectures in Dārul ʿUlūm Deoband began with ʿAllāmah Anwar
Shāh Kashmīrī v. He possessed the treasures of knowledge which
overflowed like a fountain during dars (class). He collected the details
and information of every science. After him, an effort was made to
continue this style to an extent so that there be no doubt of being
disadvantaged in the student’s mind.
Mawlānā Sanbhalī v was in Dārul ʿUlūm Mau in 1340 A.H. (1920) and
1341 A.H. for sure. In the first year, Mawlānā Ḥabībur Raḥmān Aʿẓmī v
and Mawlānā ʿAbdul Majīd ṣāḥib Maui v studied dorah ḥadīth by him.
In the next year, Mawlānā ʿAbdul Laṭīf Nuʿmānī v and his classmates
studied by him.
We do not know more than this regarding Mawlānā Sanbhali’s v

biography. Mawlānā Muḥammad Manẓūr Nuʿmānī v was his very close
and dear friend. He came with him to Mau during his childhood. After
graduating, Mawlānā Aʿẓmī v and Mawlānā Nuʿmani v immediately
became teachers in Dārul ʿUlūm Mau. Thus, both of them received the
honour of being students here. Mawlānā Nuʿmānī v has written that he
came to Dārul ʿUlūm Mau in Shawwāl 1339 A.H. (Tadhkirah Nuʿmānī pg. 33)
352
By seeing such worthy students, one can accurately conclude that

Mawlānā Sanbhali v was a great and exceptional teacher. Along with
manqūlāt (Prophetic knowledge), he was also a great scholar in
maʿqūlāt (rational knowledge). ‫ رحمه هللا رحمة واسعة‬Mawlānā Aʿẓmī v also
studied advanced books regarding maʿqūlāt by him. (Tadhkirah Nuʿmānī
pg.143)
Mawlānā Manẓūr Nuʿmānī v has written that he bade farewell to this

world on Wednesday, 17 Shawwāl, 1361 A.H. at 8 a.m. in the morning.
‫انا هلل وانا اليہ راجعون‬-To Allāh we belong and to Him is our return.
(Māhnāmah Al Furqān pg. 15- July,1977)
353
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS SHAYKHUL HIND ٰ
Shaykhul Hind Ḥazrat Mawlānā Maḥmūd Al-Ḥasan Deobandi v
1268 A.H. (1851) 1339A.H. (1920) Age:71
Name and Lineage:
Name: Maḥmūd Ḥasan
Father’s name: Dhulfiqār ʿAlī.
Grand-father’s name: Shaykh Fataḥ ʿAlī.
Birth
Ḥazrat Shaykhul Hind v was born in the year 1268 A.H. (1851) in
Bareilly whilst his father Mawlānā Dhulfiqār ʿAlī v was residing there
due to work commitments.
His Studies
He began his studies at the age of six. He studied majority of the Qurʾān
from Miānjī Manglūrī v. He studied some portions of the Qurʾān and
the beginner Fārsī kitābs (Persian books) by Miānjī Mawlānā ʿAbdul
Laṭīf ṣāḥib v. He studied the other Persian books and the beginner
Arabic books by his uncle, Mawlānā Mihtāb ʿAlī v.
The Establishment of Dārul ʿUlūm Deoband
In Muḥarram 1283 A.H. (1867) when he was 15 years old, the Dārul
ʿUlūm was established under the name of ‘ʿArbī Madrasah’. The first
teacher appointed was Mullā Maḥmūd Deobandi (death:1304 A.H.) v.
Mawlānā Maḥmūd Ḥasan ṣāḥib v was also amongst the first students of
the madrasah. In 1284 A.H., he studied “Kanzud Daqāʾiq”, “Mībdhī”,
“Mukhtaṣar Maʿānī” etc. In 1285 A.H., he set the exam for “Hidāyah”,
“Mishkāt Sharīf”, “Maqāmāt” etc. In 1286 A.H., he began studying the
Ṣaḥīḥ Sittah and some other books by his teacher Mawlānā Muḥammad
Qāsim Nanotwī v (death:1297 A.H.). At that time, Mawlānā Nanotwi v
354
was working on editing a book in a publishing house in Meerut.

Thereafter, when the publishing house moved to Delhi, he also resided
in Delhi. Sometimes, he resided in Deoband and Nanotah. He fulfilled
the rights of a teacher in all these places and continued his lessons. In
1289 A.H., these books were completed. At that time, he studied books
on adab (literature) and also studied the fields of ḥisāb (accounting)
etc. and thus graduated in aqlī and naqlī knowledge. In Dhul Qaʿdah
1290 A.H., at the madrasah’s graduation ceremony, he attained the
virtue of graduating, receiving his certificate of completion and turban
of honour on the hands of the akābir ʿulamāʾ (senior scholars).
Teaching
Before graduating, in 1289/1290 A.H, he began teaching different

books as an assistant teacher. He also continued to teach after
graduating. In 1292 A.H., he was appointed as a teacher who was given
wages. In 1293 A.H., he taught “Mishkāt”, “Hidāyah” and “Jāmiʿ
Tirmidhī”. In 1295 A.H., he also taught “Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī”. Due to his great
ability, he advanced very quickly.
His Journey for Ḥajj
In Shawwāl 1294 A.H., he went for ḥajj in the caravan with the akābirs.
Here, he obtained a chain of Ḥadīth from Shāh ʿAbdul Ghanī Mujaddidī
v. He took bayʿah on the hands of Ḥājī Imdādullāh v. Ḥājī Ṣāḥib v gave
him ijāzah (authorisation) for khilāfah. Ḥazrat Nanotwī v also accepted
his bayʿah in all four silsilahs (legitimate orders) and granted him
ijāzah.
In 1305 A.H., he was appointed as the head teacher. He taught

advanced books from the very beginning. However, Mawlānā Sayyid
Aḥmad Dehlawī v, who was the first teacher, left for Bhopal and before
him Mawlānā Yaʿqūb Nanotwī v and Mullā Maḥmūd v passed away.
Thus, he was appointed as the head teacher. Shaykhul Hind v taught in
Dārul ʿUlūm Deoband until 1333 A.H. In these 40 + years, many great
355
ʿulamāʾ and people of virtue benefitted from him and a world [of
knowledge] blossomed. Mawlānā Ashraf ʿAlī Thanwī v also learnt by
him. ʿAllāmah Anwar Shāh Kashmīrī v, ʿAllāmah Shabbir Aḥmed
ʿUthmānī v, Muftī Kifāyatullāh Dehlawī v, Mawlānā Ḥusayn Aḥmad
Madanī v and Mawlānā Sayyid Aṣghar Ḥusayn Deobandi v, who were
internationally renowned, were all his students Through him, the Dārul
ʿUlūm became a global institution.
Freedom Movement
He inherited animosity for the British from his teachers, Ḥazrat

Nanotwī v and Gangohī v. He was passionate regarding jihād to free
India from the oppression of the British. In this regard, he was
captured in 1333 A.H. after ḥajj. He remained imprisoned in Malta for
over three years. It is during this time that he completed a translation
of the Holy Qurʾān. Before being imprisoned, he had completed six
paras.
During this time, he also wrote a commentary on sixty-seven (67)

chapters of Saḥīḥ Bukhārī. After being freed from his imprisonment in
Malta, he was addressed by the title, ‘Shaykhul Hind’.
Death:
Five months after arriving in Mumbai, he passed away in Delhi on 18

Rabīʿ-ul-Awwal 1339 A.H. (30 November 1920). He was buried in
Deoband v- May Allāh’s mercy be upon him.
His Books:
He also left the following compilations as memoirs:
 ʾAdillah Kāmilah
 Īḍāḥul ʾAdillah
 Sharḥ ʾAwthaqul ʿUrā fī Taḥqīqil Jumuʿah fil Qurā by Gangohī v
356
 Jadhul Muqil fī tanzīhil Muʿiz wal Mudhil and many others.

(Extracted from Az Ḥayāt Shaykhul Hind by Mawlānā Sayyid Aṣghar Ḥusayn
Deobandi v and Naqsh Ḥayāt Ḥazrat Madnī)
357
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS ḤAZRAT NANOTWĪ ٰ
Ḥujjatul Islām Ḥazrat Mawlānā Muḥammad Qāsim Nanotwī v
1248 A.H. (1832) 1297 A.H. (1880) Age: 49 years
Name and Lineage
Name: Muḥammad Qāsim ibn Asad ʿAlī ibn Ghulām Shāh ibn
Muḥammad Baksh Ṣiddīqī Nanotwī
Birth
He was born in Nanotwah in 1248 A.H.
Acquiring Knowledge
From his childhood, Ḥazrat Nanotwī v left Nanotwah and went to

Deoband. He studied Arabic in the house of Shaykh Karāmah v. He then
went to Sahāranpūr with his maternal grandfather. Here, he studied
the beginner Arabic and Persian books by Mawlānā Muḥammad Nawāz
Ṣāḥib Sahāranpūrī v. After this, he went by Mawlānā Mamlūk ʿAlī Ṣāḥib
v in Delhi in Muḥarram 1260 A.H. He studied the darsī (syllabus)
books by him. He studied Ḥadīth by Shāh ʿAbdul Ghanī Ṣāḥib
Mujaddadī Dehlawī v and he took bayʿah on the hands of Ḥājī
Imdādullāh Muhājir Makkī v. He attained the pinnacle of excellence by
acquiring fayḍ (spiritual influence and benefit) from his Shaykh. Ḥājī
Ṣāḥib v considered him as his own tongue, and he said: “Such people
were present in previous times. Now, for many years, there has not
been anyone like that.”
After teaching, he began editing books in the publishing house Aḥmadī

in Delhi which was established by Muḥaddith Aḥmad ʿAlī Sahāranpūrī
v. Muḥaddith Sahāranpūrī v began writing footnotes on Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī.
He assigned the task of the footnotes of the last five paras to Mawlānā
Nanotwī v. These parts were difficult especially those places where
Imām Bukhārī v made objections against Imām Abū Hanīfah v.
However, Mawlānā Nanotwī v edited the books thoroughly, wrote
358
excellent footnotes and he left no stone unturned in supporting the

Ḥanafī madh-hab (school of thought). Until now, this Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī is
published in India and Pakistan. He memorised the Qurʾān in the
Ramaḍān of two years.
He was very simple and humble. Let alone writing fatāwās or

endorsing them, he never explained the rulings himself to anyone; he
would refer (that person) to others. He lived like a friend with his
students and murīds. He had many debates with priests and Aryans (a
Hindu sect) and established the reality and truth of Islām.
His Books
He wrote the following in support of the Ḥanafī Madh-hab:
 Tawthīqul Kalām fī tarkil Qirāʿah Khalf Imām

 Dalīlul Muḥkam fī tarkil Qirāʿah lil Muʾtam
 Miṣbāḥut Tarāwīḥ and others.
The following books are his memoirs regarding the reply he gave to
those who opposed Islām:
 Taqrīr dil Padhir

 Intiṣārul Islām
 Ḥujjatul Islām
 Milaʾ-e- Khudā Shanāsī
 Qiblah Numah
 Tuḥfa-e-Lamḥiyyah
 Mubāḥathah Shāh Jahān Pūr
A unique book regarding the seal of the Prophet n’s prophethood is

“Taḥdhīrun Nās ʿan inkārī athari Ibn ʿAbbas”. In reply to the objections
made against this, he wrote, “Ajwibah Arbaʿīn”. “Āb Ḥayāt” is regarding
the Prophet n’s life in the barzakh. He wrote unmatched books
regarding the beliefs of the Shīʿas. Apart from these, he also has many
other books and poems.
359
He participated in jihād Shāmilī in 1273 A.H. (1857) against the British

for the freedom of India. When the warrants to capture came, he
remained hidden for just three days. He then came out and said that
the Prophet n also remained hidden for three days.
He performed 3 ḥajj: 1277A.H. (1860), 1286 A.H. (1869), 1294 A.H.

(1877).
For the protection of the Dīn of the Muslims, he was the driving force of
the establishment of Dārul ʿUlūm Deoband in 1283 A.H. (1867 C.E.) and
he wrote its eight principles
Death: He passed away on Thursday, 4th Jumādal-ʾŪlā 1297 A.H. (1880

C.E.) in Deoband. The place where he was buried became known as
Qāsmī’s Graveyard. It is in this same place that Ḥazrat Shaykhul Hind,
Ḥazrat Mawlānā Ḥusayn Aḥmed Madnī etc. were buried. ‫رحمه هللا واسعة‬
‫رحمة‬. (Extracted from Bīs Bare Musalmān (20 honourable Muslims), pg. 114 & Al
Ḥazrat Gangohī v, one of the first patrons and spiritual reformers of Maẓāhirul
ʿUlūm, gave the following advice and guidance.
“It is important for the principal to make a great effort to ensure that the
students study Ḥadīth and fiqh with great attention and ponder upon it as
this is the fundamental objective for which madāris are established. The
other fields either surround and support these (i.e., Ḥadīth and Fiqh) such
as Arabic grammar, literature, uṣūl or they negatively affect these such as
philosophy ….”
The same request is being made to the teachers (of Maẓāhirul ʿUlūm); they
should ensure to encourage students to pay attention in the dars.
Additionally, during their Dīni discourses, they should always encourage
students to study and research with full concentration and understanding
and that they should also pay great attention to the fields of Dīn, especially
the field of Ḥadīth. And I hope for the mercy of Allāh. Rashīd Aḥmad
Gangohī. May he be forgiven.
(Extracted from Takhaṣṣuṣ Ḥadīth Sharīf written by Mawlānā Muḥammad Shāhid Sahāranpūrī page7)
360
ʿAnāqidul Ghāliyah Mawlānā ʿĀshiq Ilahī Barnī Madnī pg. 39)
361
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS ḤAZRAT GANGOHĪ ٰ
Imām Rabbānī Ḥazrat Mawlānā Rashīd Aḥmad Gangohī v
1244 A.H. (1829 C.E.) 1323 A.H. (1905 C.E.) Age: 79

years
Name and Lineage
His name is Rashīd Aḥmad ibn Hidāyah Aḥmad. He is of Anṣārī and

Ayyūbī lineage.
Birth
Mawlānā v was born on Monday, 6 Dhul Qaʿdah, 1244 A.H. (1829 C.E.)
in Gangoh. He was only seven (7) years old when his father’s shadow
was lifted from above him. He remained under the care of his mother.
His great grandfather, Qāḍī Pīr Baksh Ṣāḥib became his guardian.
Studies
He first acquired knowledge from Miyānjī Quṭub Baksh and from his
maternal uncle, Mawlānā Muḥammad Taqī v. He studied Persian by
Mawlānā Muḥammad Ghawth v, and he studied beginner’s Naḥw and
Ṣarf by Mawlānā Muḥammad Baksh Rāmpūrī v. Thereafter, he went
towards Delhi. This occurred in 1261 A.H. Mawlānā Muḥmmad Qāsim
ṣāḥib Nanotwī v was there at that time.
He studied most of the books regarding maʿqūlāt, uṣūl fiqh, maʿānī and
tafsīr by the father of Mawlānā Yāʿqūb Nanotwī v, Mawlānā Mamlūk
ʿAlī Nanotwī v (death:1267 A.H) who taught in Madrasah ʿArabiyyah,
i.e., in Delhi’s College. He studied some maʿqūlāt books by Ṣadruṣ
Ṣudūr, Muftī Ṣadrud Dīn ṣāḥib Āzardah v. He studied some of the Ṣiḥāḥ
Sittah books by Shāh ʿAbdul Ghanī Mujaddadī Dehlawī v and he also
studied some by his brother Shāh Aḥmed Saʿīd Mujaddadī Dehlawī v.
He stayed in Delhi for approximately four years. During this period, he

perfected and mastered all the fields of knowledge. He then returned to
362
Gangoh, got married and memorised the Qurʾān in one year.

Thereafter, he came to Gangoh in the service of Ḥājī Imdādullāh
Muḥājir Makkī v and after taking bayʿah, he spent forty days there and
then departed. On his return, he obtained khilāfah. Ḥājī Ṣāḥib v, while
bidding him farewell said to him that if anyone requests bayʿah, accept
it.
In 1273 A.H (1857C.E.), he participated with Ḥājī Ṣāḥib v in jihād

against the British government. Ḥazrat Ḥājī Ṣāḥib v was the leader of
the mujāhidīn. Ḥazrat Nanotwī v was the commander and Ḥazrat
Gangohī v, the judge. After the Shāmilī battle, there was a command to
capture all three of them. Ḥājī Ṣāḥib v secretly migrated. Ḥazrat
Nanotwī v hid for three (3) days and then emerged. However, he was
not captured. Ḥazrat Gangohī v remained in jail for approximately six
(6) months. Then, he was freed.
Teaching
After being freed, along with bayʿah and irshād (spiritually guiding and
reforming the people), he became preoccupied in teaching. He
performed 3 ḥajj. The first one in 1280 A.H. and the second in 1294
A.H. On this journey, Ḥazrat Nanotwī, Mawlānā Muḥammad Maẓhar,
Mawlānā Yaʿqūb Nanotwī, Mawlānā Rafīʿ-ud-Dīn Ṣāḥib Deobandī and
Ḥazrat Shaykhul Hind ‫ رحمهم هللا‬were all present as well with him. Until
then, Ḥazrat Gangohī v used to teach tafsīr, ḥadīth, aqīdah and fiqh. His
third ḥajj was in 1299 A.H. He kept meeting Ḥājī Imdạdullāh Muḥājīr
Makkī v and Shāh ʿAbdul Ghanī Muḥaddith v in the Ḥaramayn
Sharifayn. Before this third journey, the Muḥaddith Shāh ʿAbdul Ghanī
v passed away in 1296 A.H. After returning from this journey, he took
it upon himself to complete the Ṣiḥāḥ Sittah in a one-year period. He
taught from Shawwāl until Shaʿbān. This continued until 1314 A.H. (Bīs
Bare Musalman pg. 169)
It is mentioned in “Kawkabud Durrī” 1/13 that this continued until

1309 A.H. In about 30 years, approximately over eight hundred
363
scholars graduated. He was unable to teach dorah Ḥadīth for three

years due to the occurrence of continuous tragic incidents. Then, he
began teaching dorah Ḥadīth in Dhul Qaʿdah 1311 A.H. upon the
insistence of those connected to him (disciples). He completed this in
Shaʿbān 1313 A.H. Mawlānā Muḥammad Yaḥyā ṣāḥib Kandhelwi v was
also present in this class. Rather, it was because of him that this class
took place. Mawlānā Muḥammad Yaḥyā ṣāḥib v documented the
lectures that he delivered during these years which was then published
under the titles, “Kawkabud Durrī” and “Lāmiʿ-ud-Darārī”. Books have
been written on his accomplishments and excellent attributes. He died
in Jamād-al-ʾUkhrā 1323 A.H. ‫( رحمه هللا رحمة واسعة‬Bīs Bare Musalmān, Al
ʿAnāqid Al Ghāliyah pg. 38, Muqaddamah Lāmiʿ pg. 2 and Kawkab, pg. 13 and other
than this)
His Teaching Style
Ḥazrat Gangohī v first taught Tirmidhī Sharīf. He would explain and

discuss in full details regarding the matn (text) and sanad (chain) and
also regarding removing contradictions and giving preference. Then,
he taught the remaining books with less details. He only commented on
the specialities of that book. (Muqaddamah Lāmiʿ pg. 3 & ʿAnāqidul Ghāliyah pg.
38)
Ḥazrat Gangohī v had this special virtue and capability to relate a

comprehensive discussion in a few words. He was naturally connected
to the field of Ḥadīth. He was of sound nature. He passed verdicts in
rulings with differences of opinion with great justice. He was free from
being on any extreme. He maintained good thoughts and respect for
the salafuṣ ṣāliḥīn and the Imāms of Ḥadīth and fiqh. He would mention
such an interpretation for the narrations that the contradiction would
be removed.
Specialities and Excellent Attributes
He was from amongst the leading living examples of taqwā and

following the Sunnah. He despised innovations and customs. He fought
364
against this. He was not in the least bit lenient in this regard. Many
examples of this have been mentioned in his biography. He clearly
stated the truth. His purpose in life was to spread the Sunnah and the
Sharʿīah. He could not tolerate any evil and he had no fear for anyone’s
criticism.
Despite this, he had a gentle and humble nature. He remained firm on

the truth. If the ḥaqq (truth) became apparent, he would retract from
his previous statement.
He left such khulafāʾ (successors) and students who continued his

mission. They made endless efforts in spreading the Sharʿīah and the
Sunnah and in ending the evils and innovations. Mawlānā Khalīl
Aḥmad Sahāranpūrī, Ḥazrat Shaykhul Hind and Mawlānā Muḥammad
Ilyās Dehlawī ‫ رحمهم هللا‬were very well-known in this regard.
Ḥazrat Mawlānā Muḥammad Ilyās ṣāḥib v said: “Ḥazrat Gangohī was

the leading spiritual guide and revivalist of this era. However, it is not
necessary for all the reformation to be conducted by the revivalist
himself. Rather, the work done by those working with him is also
connected to him just like how the work of the Khulafāʾ Rāshidīn, in
particular Shaykhayn’s h work, is the work of Rasūlullāh n in reality.”
(Malfūẓāt Mawlānā Muḥammad Ilyās pg. 123, Martaba Mawlānā Muḥammad Mandhūr
Nuʿmānī)
Books
Ḥazrat Gangohī v left books as memoirs on various topics. Some of his

most famous ones are as follows:
1. Hidayatush Shīʿa- Replies to objections by against Hādī ʿAlī Shīʿī.

2. Zubadatul Manāsik
3. Ar-Rāʾyul qabīḥ fī ithbātit Tarāwīḥ
4. Awthaqul ʿUrā – In reply to Jumuʿah fil Qurā.
5. Hidāyyatul Muqtadī- Regarding the topic of qirāʿāh behind the
Imām.
6. Sabīlur Rashād- Refuting not doing taqlīd.
365
7. Quṭūfe Dāniyah- Regarding the karāhah of a second jamāʿah in

the masjid of the locality.
8. Radduṭ Ṭughyān- Reply to those who claim that the stops in the
Qurʾān are an innovation.
9. Iḥtiyāṭuz Ẓuhr- Where there is Jumuʿah Ṣalāh, there is no need to
read Ẓuhr as a precaution.
10. Fatāwā Rashīdiyyah (See Taẓkirah Rashīd by Ḥazrat Mawlānā ʿĀshiq
Ilāhī Mirthi & Bīs bare Musalmān pg. 146 for details.)
366
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS SHĀH ʿABDUL GHANĪ ٰ
Shaykh Shāh ʿAbdul Ghanī Mujaddidī Dehlawī, Muḥājīr Madanī v
1235 A.H 1296 A.H. (1846 C.E.) Age: 61 years
His name is ʿAbdul Ghanī. His father’s name is Abū Saʿīd Mujaddidī. His
lineage reaches Mujaddid Alf Thānī, Ḥazrat Shaykh Aḥmad through
some forefathers. It is for this reason that he and his father are also
known as Mujaddadi.
Birth
Shāh ʿAbdul Ghanī was born in Shaʿbān 1235 A.H. in Delhi. He sought
knowledge from his childhood. He studied Ḥanafī fiqh and memorised
the Qurʾān. He studied majority of aḥādīth and other books by his
father, Shaykh Abū Saʿīd Mujaddidī v. Specifically, he also studied the
Ṣiḥāḥ Sittah, Muwaṭṭāʾ Imām Muḥammad and Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī by Ḥazrat
Shāh Muḥammad Isḥāq v. He studied Mishkāt by Shaykh Makhṣūṣullāh
ibn Shāh Rafīʿuddīn v. He also studied Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī by Shaykh
Muḥammad ʿĀbid Sindhī v and also obtained ijāzah (authorisaton) for
other books. He also obtained ijāzah from Shaykh Abū Zāhid Ismāʿīl ibn
Idrīs Rūmī (later known as Madnī) v. He obtained ijāzah in silsilah
Naqshbandī from his father and he became his successor and worked
as a spiritual guide.
He wrote an excellent and valuable ḥāshiyah (marginalia) on Sunan

Ibn Mājah, “Injāhul Ḥājah” which is widely accepted.
He was always occupied in teaching, advising and guiding. When there

was corruption in Delhi and the disbelievers gained power, he
migrated to Ḥijāz with some of his people. He first went to Makkah and
then he went to Madīnah and stayed there. He spent his days and
nights in conducting dars (teaching) and in reciting adʿiyah and
adhkār. Here, many ʿulamāʾ benefitted from him.
Amongst his students are the following akābir (senior scholars) of

India:
367
 Mullā Maḥmūd Deobandī v (death:1304 A.H.)

 Ḥazrat Mawlānā Rashīd Aḥmad Gangohī v
 Ḥazrat Mawlānā Muḥammad Qāsim Nānotwī v
 Mawlānā ʿAbdul Ḥalīm Farangī Maḥallī v
 Mawlānā ʿAbdul Ḥay Farangī Maḥallī v
 Mawlānā Maḥmūd Ḥasan Deobandī Shaykhul Hind v
 Mawlānā Khalīl Aḥmed Sahāranpūrī v, the author of “Badhlul
Majhūd”.
 Mawlānā Muḥammad Yaʿqūb Nānotwī v
 Mawlānā Raḥmatullāh Kīrānwī v, the founder of Madrasah
Ṣālitiyyah Makkah Mukarramah.
His students from Ḥijāz are as follows:
 Shaykh Shihābud Dīn Aḥmad ibn Ismāʿīl Barzanjī v

 Shaykh Ḥasbullāh MakkĪ v
 Shaykh ʿAbdul Jalīl Barādah v
 Sayyid Amīn Riḍwān v
 Shaykh Fāliḥ ibn Muḥammad Ẓāhirī v
 Shaykh ʿUthmān Dāghistānī Madnī v
People from the west also took ijāzah from him.
After him, his daughter also gave ijāzah through him. Mawlānā
Muḥammad Yūsuf Binnorī v took ijāzah from her.
Death
He died in Muḥarram 1296 A.H. in Madīnah Munawwarah. May Allāh

be pleased with him and make him pleased and make Jannah his abode.
His father, Shaykh Abū Saʿīd Mujaddidī v and Shāh Muḥammad Isḥāq v
acquired the knowledge of aḥādīth from Shāh ʿAbdul ʿAzīz muḥaddith
Dehlawī v. He, from his father until the end of the chain.
368
ʿAllāmah ʿAbdul Ḥay Kattānī v states that there is no stronger and

more reliable chain than his amongst the chains of the mutaʾakh-khirīn
(later scholars). This is because coupled with it being a high chain, it is
continuous with those aʾimmah of high status of that place and era.
(Extracted from Al ʿAnāqid Al Ghāliyah pg. 34,35)
369
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS SHĀH MUḤAMMAD ISḤĀQ ٰ
Musnidul Hind Shāh Muḥammad Isḥāq Dehlawī Makkī v
Date of Birth: 1197 A.H.
Date of Death: 1262 A.H.
Age: 65 years
Name: Muḥammad Isḥāq
Kunyah (Teknonym): Abū Sulaymān
Lineage: Muḥammad Isḥāq ibn Muḥammad Afḍal ibn Aḥmad Sulaymān

ibn Manṣūr…. ʿUmrī Dehlawī
Birth: He was born on 8th Dhul Ḥijjah 1196 A.H. or 1197 A.H. in Delhi.
Education
He grew up under the care of his grandfather Shāh ʿAbdul ʿAzīz

Dehlawī v. He learnt ṣarf and naḥw, up to “Kāfiyah” from Shaykh
ʿAbdul Ḥayy ibn Hibatullāh Badhānwī v. He studied the remainder of
the syllabus books from Shaykh ʿAbdul Qādir ibn Shāh Walīullāh v. He
acquired the knowledge of Ḥadīth and its chains from Shāh ʿAbdul ʿAzīz
v.
He was like a child to Shāh Ṣāḥib. Shāh ʿAbdul ʿAzīz v made him his
successor. He gifted all his wealth, books and house to him. After Shāh
Ṣāḥib, he became his successor. He was of great benefit to the people.
370
Journey to Ḥijāz
In the year 1240 A.H., he travelled to the Ḥaramayn Sharīfayn. Here, he

received the chain of Ḥadīth from Shaykh ʿAbdul Karīm ibn ʿAbdur
Rasūl Makkī Shāfīʿī v (death: 1247 A.H.). Thereafter, he came to India
and taught in Delhi for sixteen years.
Shaykh ʿUmar ibn ʿAbdul Karīm v would say: “He inherited the
blessings of his grandfather, Shaykh ʿAbdul ʿAzīz Dehlawī.” The
aforementioned, Shaykh ʿUmar Makkī v believed that he excelled in the
science of Ḥadīth and its narrators.
He was famous for his knowledge, piety and other virtues. In his era,
there was no other chain of narration of Ḥadīth in India. Many people
acquired the knowledge of Ḥadīth from him until he became the centre
of all Ḥadīth chains. This is what is meant by Musnidul Hind.
Migration
In the year 1258 A.H., he left to perform ḥajj again and after completing
Ḥajj, he chose to stay in Makkah Mukarramah. All his children and his
younger brother, Muḥammad Yaʿqūb were also with him.
Many of his students became great scholars. Amongst them are: Nawāb
Quṭbud Dīn Dehlawī, the author of “Maẓāhir Ḥaq” (died: 1279 A.H. in
Makkah 1 ), Shaykh Aḥmad ʿAlī ibn Luṭfullāh Saḥāranpurī (died:
1297A.H.), the muḥasshī of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī. (In Makkah, he copied
books with his own hands and read them to Shāh Muḥammad Isḥāq.).
Mawlānā Muḥammad Maẓhar Nānotwī (died: 1302 A.H.), Qarī ʿAbdur
Raḥmān Pānī-Pattī (died: 1314 A.H.), Shāh ʿAbdul Ghanī Mujddidī
(died: 1296 A.H.) and others ‫رحمهم هللا‬.
1In “Nuzhatul Khawāṭir” (7/426) it is mentioned that his death occurred in

the year 1289 A.H.
371
Shāh Muḥammad Isḥāq v also translated Mishkāt. He left behind a few

other books. There are some writings which are attributed to him in
which there are errors. It is farfetched that he made such errors. It is
said that from amongst his companions there were some evil people.
He kept good thoughts regarding them. They are the ones who inserted
these things in his books. (Shaykh Muḥammad Zakariyyā v mentioned this in the
introduction of Awjaz.)
Death: He died on Monday 27th Rajab 1262 A.H. while fasting. He was
buried close to Sayyidatunā Khadijatul Kubrā d in Jannatul Maʿlāh.
‫( رحمه هللا رحمة واسعة‬Extracted from Al-Anāqīd Al-Ghāliyah pg. 28)
372
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS SHĀH ʿABDUL ʿAZĪZ ٰ
Sirājul Hind
Ḥazrat Shāh ʿAbdul ʿAzīz Muḥaddith Dehlawī v
Birth: 1159 A.H.
Death: 1239 A.H.
Age: 80
Shāh ʿAbdul ʿAzīz Muḥaddith Dehlawī’s birth name was Ghulām Ḥalīm.
He was born on 25th Ramaḍān in the year 1159 A.H./1746 C.E. in Delhi.
At the age of eleven, upon completing the Qurʾān and learning Persian,
he began to learn the Arabic language. At the age of fifteen he
completed all customary sciences. He studied ʿulūm ʿaqliyyah (rational
sciences) from the students of his respected father, Shāh Waliullāh
Dehlawī v. He studied Ḥadīth and fiqh from Shāh Ṣāḥib directly. He was
seventeen years old when his father passed away. Thus, he completed
his studies by Shāh Ṣāḥib’s special student Mawlānā Muḥammad ʿĀshiq
Philtī v.
After Shāh Walīullāh Muḥaddith Dehlawī’s death, he became his

successor and khalīfah. He was the eldest from amongst his brothers.
He became fully preoccupied in teaching, writing and compiling books
and advising and guiding the people. He became an expert in all the
common fields of knowledge and in the rational and Prophetic fields.
His memory was strong. His speech was meaningful, enchanting,
structured and pleasant. All these excellent qualities and achievements
made him someone who was approached by both the general public
and the scholars. Shaykh Muḥammad Thānwī v states that Shāh ʿAbdul
ʿAzīz Muḥaddith Dehlawī v knew the matn (text) of six thousand
(6000) aḥādīth by heart.
Nawāb Ṣiddīq Ḥasan Khan ṣāḥib v has written that he was the seal of
the muḥaddithīn and mufassirīn of India. He excelled amongst his
contemporaries in memorization and knowledge, interpretation of
373
dreams, speeches, writing, conducting valuable and knowledgeable

research, discourses and debating with opponents. He had a
distinguished position among his contemporaries with regards to the
beliefs which coincided with the correct ʿaqīdah and that which
contradicted it.
He spent his entire life teaching, issuing fatāwā, passing judgments,

giving lectures, training disciples and perfecting students. Coupled
with these inner perfections and excellent attributes, he was also
blessed with a dignified, honourable, reverent and respectful outward
appearance. The leader of the mujāhidīn, Sayyid Aḥmed Shāhīd Barelwī
v pledged allegiance to him. His family was a family of Ḥadīth and
Ḥanafī fiqh.
Mawlānā ʿAbdul Qādir v stated that Shāh ʿAbdul ʿAzīz ṣāḥib v was
renowned for being a person of knowledge in the fields of tafsīr,
Ḥadīth, fiqh, sīrah and tārikh (history). There was no one in his era
who was more knowledgeable than him in the following fields:
astronomy, geometry 1 , Almagest (a book on mathematics and
astronomy)2, the science of optics3, the astrolabe4, physics5, logic,
debate, issues of consensus and differences of opinions, religious and
philosophical views, physiognomy, interpretations, reconciliation of
varying opinions and explanation of ambiguous statements.
He had a high rank in the field of literature and in understanding and

interpreting every type of poem. In manqūl (Prophetic knowledge), he
would present evidence from the Qurʾān and Ḥadīth. In maʿqūl
.‫ المنجد‬.‫ علم يحث فيه عن أحوال المقادير من حيث التقدير‬،‫ الحد والقياس‬،‫ مص‬:‫ هندسه‬1
‫) علم ہيئت اورفلكيات كى ايك قديم كتاب جسےمصر‬١٥٩٤/٢ ‫ بكسرالميم والجيم (كشف الظنون‬:‫مجسطى‬
ِ 2
‫ حسين بن اسحق نے عہد مامون ميں اس کا عربی‬،‫ ہجری ميں لکہا‬١٤٠‫كے مشہور عالم بطليموس نے‬
)‫ترجمہ کيا (کشف الظنون والقاموس الوحيد‬
.‫ المنجد‬.‫ علم تعرف به مقادير األشياء باعتبار قربها أو بعدها من نظر الناظر‬:‫ علم ال َمناظر‬3
.‫ المنجد‬.‫ آلة يقيس بها الفلكيون ارتفاع الكواكب‬:‫ اسطرَلب‬4
.‫ منجد‬.‫ ما يحث فيه عن طبائع اَلشياء وماجعله البارى فيه من الخصائص والقوى‬:‫ طبعيات‬5
374
(rational knowledge), he would mention whichever evidence he found

befitting. He never tried to justify and support the statements and
opinions of the philosophers of Yunān (Greece) nor Rāzī, etc. (Extracted
from Fawʾid Jāmiʿah on ʿUjālah Nafiʿah pg. 274)
He used to hold gatherings of advice twice a week. A great number of

enthusiastic and faithful ones gathered and he would guide and advise
them. (Extracted from Fawāʾid Jāmiʿah on ʿUjālah Nafiʿah, pg. 275)
Death: He departed from this temporary world on Sunday, 9th Shawwāl

in the year 1239 A.H.
Books:
In the field of Ḥadīth, two books of his are famous. One is titled
“Bustānul Muḥaddithīn”, which comprises of the famous books of
Ḥadīth and the biography of their authors. This book was originally
written in Persian. Its Urdu translation has been published.
(2) The second book is “ʿUjālah Nāfiʿah” which is a reflection of Shāh

Ṣāḥib’s knowledge of Ḥadīth. (Extracted from Fawāʾid Jāmiʿah on ʿUjālah
Nafiʿah pg. 275)
(3) Tuhfah Ithnā ʿAshriyyah: This is a unique book refuting the Shīʿas.
(4) Tafsīr ʿAzīzī: The commentary of Sūrah Baqarah and the last two
parts. Its title is Fatḥul ʿAzīz. If this was completed, there would have
been no tafsīr as excellent as it.
(5) Taḥqīqur Ruʾyah
(6) Risālah Fayḍ ʿĀm
(7) Sirrush Shāhādatayn (This is regarding the martyrdom of Ḥusayn

z)
375
(8) ʿAzīz ul Iktibās Fī Faḍāʾil-e-Akhbār-un- Nās
(9) Chahār Bāb
(10) Aḥsanul Ḥasānāt (Extracted from the Muqaddamah of Awjaz pg. 72)
(11) Fatāwā ʿAzīzī: A compilation of Shāh Ṣāḥib’s fatāwā.
Shāh Ṣāḥib was a person upon whose hands karāmāt would occur. The
first time he led tarāwīḥ, he saw in a dream that the Noble Messenger n
was also present. Other than this, he also possessed many virtues. Allāh
l blessed him with such students through which his knowledge was
made widespread.
He was afflicted with many illnesses. For many days he did not eat.
‫رحمه هللا رحمة واسعة‬
(For more regarding his biography, see Al-Kalāmul Mufīd by Shaykh Rūḥul Amīn
Bangladeshī, pg. 310 onwards.)
376
377
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS SHĀH WALĪULLĀH ٰ
Ḥazrat Shāh Walīullāh Muḥaddith Dehlawī v
Birth: 1114 A.H./ 1702 C.E.
Death: 1176 A.H./ 1763 C.E.
Age: 62 years
Name And Lineage:
Name: Aḥmad
Kunyah (teknonym): Abul Fayāḍ.
He was known as Walīullāh. His bashāratī name was Quṭbud Dīn. His
historic name was ʿAdhīmud Dīn. He is a Fārūqī by lineage. His lineage
from his mother’s side goes back to Mūsā p.
Birth: He was born on 4th Shawwāl 1114 A.H./1702 C.E., eighty years
after the demise of Ḥazrat Mujaddid Alfe Thānī v in Muẓaffarnagar, U.P.
He was four years old when the King of Alamghīr Aurangzeb passed
away.
His father, Shāh ʿAbdur Raḥīm v was a great scholar of his era. He was
a faqīh (jurist) and righteous ṣūfī (mystic). He also contributed
towards the compilation of Fatāwā Ālamghīrī. He had a deep insight in
the juzʾiyyāt (subsidiary rulings) of the Ḥanafī fiqh.
378
Education And Upbringing
His father began teaching him at the age of five. He memorized the
Qurʾān at the age of seven. Thereafter, he started to learn Persian and
Arabic. At the age of ten he was proficient in naḥw (Arabic grammar).
Thereafter, he turned his attention towards maʿqūlāt (rational
knowledge). At the age of fifteen, he completed all the books on the
syllabus and became a proficient scholar. He acquired most of his
knowledge from his father. He received a sanad for Ḥadīth by
participating in the lesson of Shaykh Muḥammad Afḍal Sayālkūtī v.
Marriage and Bayʿah
At the age of fourteen, he got married and at the age of fifteen, whilst
studying “Bayḍāwī Sharīf” from his father, he took bayʿah (the oath of
allegiance) on the hands of his father. Under his guidance, he became
preoccupied in Ṣūfism. He specifically completed all the adhkār in the
Naqshbandī order. As his father fell ill and prepared himself for the
journey to the hereafter, he was granted khilāfah and was entrusted
with the responsibility of Madrasah Raḥīmiyyah and Khānqāh
Raḥīmiyyah at the tender age of seventeen.
Teaching
He started to teach at the age of seventeen. For twelve consecutive

years, with lots of diligence and effort, he taught naḥw, maʿqūlāt, ṣarf,
books of fiqh, tafsīr and Ḥadīth. He conducted a comparative study of
the four madhāhib. From that time onwards, his heart became inclined
to the methodology of the muḥaddithīn scholars. He abandoned the
traditional way and opted a new method of teaching. Through this, a
deep connection with the Qurʾān and Ḥadīth was built amongst the
fuḍalāʾ (scholars). With the help of the ʿulūm ʿaqliyyah (rational
sciences) the ability to refute all doubts was developed.
Journey to Ḥijāz
379
In the end of the year 1143 A.H./1731 C.E., he departed to perform ḥajj.
After completing ḥajj, he stayed on for an extra year. He stayed for
fourteen complete months. He performed two ḥajj. During this period,
he acquired great benefit from great scholars. Coupled with this, he
benefitted from the radiance of the rawḍah of Muḥammad n and the
Kaʿbah.
The spiritual observations he acquired from the Kaʿbah and the

rawḍah aṭ-har were compiled in Fuyūḍul Ḥaramayn.
While staying in Ḥijāz, he focused his attention on sourcing books. He

bought those books which were rare to obtain in India at whichever
price was offered.
During his stay in Ḥijāz, he developed the ability and excellence of

being a mujtahid through the influence of knowledgeable companions,
the study of books and spiritual atmosphere which widened the scope
of his services.
Fayḍ Ḥadīth
Before him, Shāh ʿAbdul Ḥaq Muḥaddith Dehlawī v (death: 1052 A.H.),
made efforts to propagate the knowledge of Ḥadīth in India. To acquire
this objective, he stayed three years in Ḥijāz to acquire the knowledge
of Ḥadīth. Accordingly, knowledge of aḥādīth was disseminated
through him and his descendants. However, this system was not
maintained. However, the system which began through Shāh Walīullāh
was blessed by Allāh l in such a way that until today that system is not
only established but it is developing, advancing and spreading
considerably.1
‫ وأقرب الناس الى المجددية المحدثون القدماء كالبخارى‬:‫ وقال فى كتابه "التفهيمات" لما تكلم على المجدد‬1
،‫ ول ِّما ت ِّمت بى دورة الحكمة ألبسنى هللا خلعة المجددية فعلمتُ علم الجمع بين المختلفات‬،‫ومسلم واشباههم‬
ِّ
‫الحق منك أن يجمع‬ ‫ى رسول هللا اشارة روحانية أنِّ مراد‬
ِّ ‫ى فى الشريعة تحريف وأشار ال‬ ُ ‫وعلم‬
َ ‫ت أن الرأ‬
)٣٠٣ ‫شمال من شمل األمة المحمدية بك ه۔ (الكالم المفيد ص‬
380
Shāh Ṣāḥib’s Service
In Shāh Ṣāḥib’s era, the condition of the Muslims in India was in

turmoil. All the filth of disbelief and immorality were embedded in
them. Their religious and moral condition had deteriorated
considerably. The Muslims began opting the ways and customs of the
Hindus. Lack of progress and blind following became customary for the
scholars. Ignorant ṣūfīs had continued the business of robbing Muslims
in the name of Peri-Muridi. Innovations were common. Ignorance was
also common. In the madāris, a greater emphasis was given on
maʿqūlāt. Attention was not focused on the primary knowledge of the
Qurʾān and Sunnah. The Qurʾān was not part of the curriculum. In
terms of Ḥadīth, “Mishkātul Maṣābīḥ” and “Mashāriqul Anwār” were
taught for barakah purposes (to reap blessings).
Shāh Ṣāḥib made such an effort to reform the Muslims through both
writing and speech which can never be forgotten. The growth and
development of the knowledge of the Dīn and the authentic form of
Islām which is currently present in the Indo-Pak region is the result of
Shāh Ṣāḥib’s efforts.
Shāh Ṣāḥib adopted a new style of teaching in which the Qurʾān and
Ḥadīth were established as the primary subjects. He compiled the
translation of the Qurʾān with some useful points in Persian which was
the common language of that time. This was the first translation which
was compiled in India. It is titled: “Fatḥur Raḥmān Fī Tarjumatil
Qurʾān”. He also wrote a brief tafsīr (commentary) in Arabic titled,
“Fatḥul Kabīr bimālābudda min ḥifẓihi fī ʿilmit tafsīr”. He wrote two
commentaries on Muwaṭṭāʾ Imām Mālik. One is titled, “Muṣaffā” which
is in Pesian and the other is titled, “Musawwā” which is written in
Arabic. By reading these, you will become aware of the Shāh Ṣāḥib’s
teaching method and his ocean of knowledge.
He purified the Islāmic taṣawwuf (spirituality) from unislāmic

mysticism and its superstitions. He also wrote books on this topic.
381
He wrote a book titled, “Izālatul Khifāʾ ʿan khilāfatil khulafāʾ” in

refutation of the Shias in which he established the khilāfah of the
Khulafāʾ Rāshidīn from the Qurʾān and Ḥadīth. He presented such
proofs from the commentaries and history which clarified all
misconceptions. According to Mawlānā ʿAbdul Ḥay Farangī Maḥallī v:
“There is no book similar to it in Islāmic literature.”
Ḥujjatullāh Bālighah
This is one of his Arabic compilations in which he explains the points

and codes of Islāmic laws and the secrets of the Sharīʿah. This is his
most monumental compilation. Truthfully, he is the inventor of this
subject. No such book has been written on this subject ever before or
ever after. It has been well received and gained recognition from the
entire academic world.
Al-Fawḍul Kabīr
This is a brief treatise on the principles of tafsīr. However, this book is

very comprehensive. Shāh Ṣāḥib divided the sciences of the Qurʾān into
five categories in a very unique and new style. He provided insightful
information regarding the abrogated verses and the causes of
revelation. It is also difficult to find a book like this. Ibn Taymiyyah’s
introduction on ʿilm tafsīr is nothing in comparison to this [treatise].
In this manner, there are fifty compilations of Shāh Ṣāḥib in which

pearls of unique knowledge and research are scattered.
Apart from his compilations, there were many students who benefitted
from him. They maintained and expanded this reform movement of
Shāh Ṣāḥib through teaching and writing. From amongst them was his
son Mawlānā Shāh ʿAbdul ʿAzīz Muḥaddith Dehlawī v who became the
successor of Shāh Ṣāḥib. Shāh Ṣāḥib had four sons. All four of them
achieved excellence in both knowledge and virtue. They are the
382
substantiation of the Persian saying: ‫( ایں خانہ ہمہ آفتاب است‬Everyone in

this family is a radiant sunshine, i.e., they all possess excellent
qualities.)
Shāh Ṣāḥib’s School of Thought
Shāh Ṣāḥib was blessed with so many excellent qualities by Allāh l

such as: depth in knowledge, proficiency in deriving proofs,
perseverance in thought and understanding, purity of heart and
adherence to the Sunnah. Hence, it was not necessary for him to follow
a single Imām. Yet, he received the spiritual attention of the Messenger
of Allāh n through which he was advised not to turn away from doing
taqlīd of the four madhāhib (schools of thought). The Messenger of
Allāh n also outlined that the Ḥanafī jurisprudence is closer to the
Sunnah and Ḥadīth than any other madh-hab. For this reason, Shāh
Ṣāḥib used to take the sayings of Imām Abū Ḥanīfah v and Ṣāḥibayn
‫رحمهم هللا‬which he considered to be closest to the Ḥadīth, and he used to
follow the opinions of those Ḥanafī jurists which had a closer
connection to the Ḥadīth. Shāh Ṣāḥib, while giving ijāzah
(authorization) to one of his students for Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī, wrote that he
was a follower of the Ḥanafī madh-hab.
In his final years, Najaf ʿAlī Khan, a fanatical Shiʿite ruler ordered for his
wrists to be cut off so that he would no longer be able to write any
other book or article.
Death: He died in Muḥarram 1176 A.H/1763 C.E in Delhi. He was

buried in Mehdiyan.‫( رحمه هللا رحمة واسعة‬Extracted from Fawāʾid Jāmiʿāh, pg.
276-287, Ẓafrul Muḥaṣalīn pg. 5-68, Al-ʿAnāqīdul Ghāliyah, Imām Shāh Walīullāh and
Mawlānā ʿAbdul Qayyūm Maẓāhirī)
383
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS ABŪ ṬĀHIR KURDĪ ٰ
Shaykh Abū Ṭāhir Kurdī Madnī v
Date of Death: 1145 A.H./1732 C.E.
Age: 64 years
Name and Lineage:
Name: Muḥammad ʿAbdūs Samīʿ. His kunyah was Abū Ṭāhir and his
title was Jamālud Dīn. His lineage: Kurdī Madnī.
Birth and Education
He was born in Madīnah Munawwarah on 21st Rajab 1081 A.H. He

acquired ʿaqliyyah (rational) and naqliyyah (Prophetic) knowledge
from his pious saintly father, Shaykh Ibrāhīm Kūrānī Madnī v and also
received the khirqah (mantle) of khilāfah from him. His respected
father had received ijāzah (authorisation) of Ḥadīth and the khirqah
(mantle) of khilāfah from Shaykh Muḥammad ibn Sulaymān Maghribī
v. He studied naḥw, adab, fiqh and the maʿqūl sciences from
experienced teachers. After his father, he mainly acquired the
knowledge of Ḥadīth from Shaykh Ḥasan ʿUjaymī v. He also heard the
ṣiḥaḥ sittah from him. After this, he studied by Shaykh Aḥmad Nakhlī v
and Shaykh ʿAbdullāh Baṣrī v. He studied “Shamāʾil Nabawī” from
Shaykh ʿAbdullāh Baṣrī v and heard “Musnad Aḥmad” from him in less
than two months.
He also benefitted from those ʿulamāʿ who came to visit the Ḥaramayn
Sharīf. Amongst them was Shaykh ʿAbdullāh Lāhorī v from whom he
narrated the books of Mullā ʿAbdul Ḥakīm Siyālkūtī v on the authority
of Shaykh ʿAbdullāh Labīb v who narrated from Mullā ʿAbdul Ḥakīm
Siyālkūtī v. He also narrated the books of Mullā ʿAbdul Ḥaq v directly
from ʿAbdul Ḥakīm, as ʿAbdul Ḥakīm was the student of Shaykh ʿAbdul
Ḥaq v.
384
From amongst them is also Shaykh Saʿīd Kawkanī v, with whom he

studied a few literature books and approximately a quarter of “ Fatḥul
Bārī”.
Shaykh Abū Ṭāhir v was adorned with the qualities of the pious
predecessors. He was a man of taqwā (Allāh consciousness) who
strove to obey Allāh. He remained occupied with knowledge and he
was just and balanced in discussions and arguments. He had such a soft
heart that when the aḥādīth of riqāq (heart-softening) were recited, his
eyes would fill with tears. He did not entertain any formalities
regarding his clothing etc. He was very humble towards his servants
and students.
He attained a great portion of righteousness, taqwā and taṣawwuf. He

was a distinguished scholar, but he was a master in the field of ḥadīth.
He was an embodiment of all the various fields of knowledge such as
ṣarf, naḥw, maʿānī and bayān, badīʿ, manṭīq, farāʾiḍ, jabr wa muqābalah
(algebra) and others. He was very prompt and prepared in teaching his
students. He exerted lots of effort into studying, teaching and
publishing books. It is said that he wrote seventy books by hand. He
performed his waẓāiʾf, maʿmūlāt, taḥajjud etc. during the night and
would never neglect the recitation of the Qurʾān, whether at home or
on a journey. He also carried out the responsibilities of Iftāʿ.
Shāh Waliullāh ṣāḥib v studied the entire Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī from him and
solved the difficult areas of this science by him. Shāh Ṣāḥib also heard
the complete Musnad Dārimī from him and read to him the entire ṣiḥāḥ
sittah. He gave Shāh ṣāḥib iijāzah (authorisation) for all his narrations
and he also granted him the khirqah (mantle) of khilāfah. He made him
well acquainted with his chains of narration.
Death
He passed away in Madīnah Munawwarah on 9th Ramaḍān 1145 A.H.

and is buried in Baqīʿ. Many attended his janāzah. ‫رحمه هللا رحمة‬
‫(واسعة‬Extracted from Fawāʾid Jāmiʿah pg. 297-304)
385
It is written in Aʿlām Zarkalī on the authority of Salk Ad-Durar that he

was born in 1081 A.H./1670 C.E. and he passed away in 1145
A.H./1733 C.E. (Aʿlām Zarkalī 5/195)
386
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS KURDĪ KAWRĀNĪ ٰ
Shaykh Ibrāhīm Ibn Ḥasan Kurdī Kawrānī Madnī v
Date of Birth: 1025 A.H
Date of Death: 1101 A.H
Age: 76 years
Name and Lineage
Shaykh Ibrāhīm ibn Ḥasan ibn Shihābud Dīn Shāharzūrī Kurdī Kawrānī
Shāfiʿī. His patronymic appellation is Abūl ʿIrfān and title is Burhānud
Dīn. Kawrān is a tribe of Kardūn. Shāharzūr is the name of a province.
He was born in his hometown in 1025 A.H. He first studied with the
ʿulamāʾ of his hometown. He completed all the sciences of ʿaqliyyah,
āliyah, tafsīr and fiqh in his hometown. He studied these sciences from
Mullā Muḥammad Sharīf Kawrānī v.
After this, he departed with the intention of performing ḥajj. He stayed

in Baghdād for approximately two years. He proceeded towards the
shrine of Shaykh ʿAbdul Qādir v and it is here that his passion for
taṣawwuf developed. He spent four years in Syria. While going to
Egypt, he came to the Ḥaramayn. On arriving in Madīnah, he stayed in
the company of Shaykh Qushāshī v. While passing through Egypt he
met Shaykh Shihābud Dīn Khafajī, Shaykh Sulṭān Mazāḥī and others
‫رحمهم هللا‬. He married the daughter of Shaykh Qushāshī v.
Shaykh Qushāshī v had a special connection with him, and he had a

special connection with Qushāshī. He narrated Ḥadīth from Qushāshī
and donned the mantle of khilāfah. He achieved a high status and
acquired many excellences though his company. He attained a
distinguished status in the fields of uṣūl, kalām, fiqh, Ḥadīth and
taṣawwuf. He was a sign from among the signs of Allāh. Books of his
are available in every field, through which his eloquence of speech and
writing can be gauged.
387
He was ascribed with the qualities of intelligence, an ocean of

knowledge, zuhd and tawāḍuʿ (asceticism and humility), patience and
forbearance. In his era, all the Islāmic countries admired him regarding
taṣawwuf, fiqh of the Shāfiʿī school of thought and knowledge of
Ḥadīth. Questions would come to him from the East and West (from all
corners of the world) to which he would reply. They were then
compiled into a booklet. His gatherings were like a garden from the
gardens of Jannah. Students of knowledge would hasten towards him
from faraway places. He gave classes in Masjid Nabawī and he was an
ocean of maʿrifah (recognition of Allāh). It is difficult to count his
students, many of whom are renowned scholars. He knew Persian,
Kurdi, Turkish and the Arabic language. He defended Ibn Taymiyyah v
and others. In a similar manner, he also gave answers to the statements
uttered by the ṣūfīs.
Books
He authored more than fifty (50) books. From amongst them “ Al-
Umam Li Īqāẓil Himam” is very famous. This is a very extensive index
on the chains of Ḥadīth. It is a very comprehensive collection of
discussions regarding Ḥadīth, tārikh (history) and kalām (aqīdah) as
well as points on ṣūfism. This book has been published by Dāʾiratul
Maʿārif Hyderabad India. (We have it. Fazl 12)
Death
He continued serving the Dīn until he departed for the next world after
ʿAṣr of Wednesday 18th Rabīʿ-ul-Awwal 1101 A.H., he is buried in Baqiʿ.
The year of his death can be taken from the following ʿibārah:
ُ ‫(وهللا ِإنَّا علي ف َِراقِكَ يَا ِإب َْراهِي ُم لَ َم‬1101 A.H.).
َ‫حْزونُون‬
Shaykh Muḥammad ʿĀbid Sindhī v has written: “His books are worthy
to be written with tears and in acquiring them one’s wealth or one’s
family and children should not be a hindrance.” (Extracted from Fawāʾid
Jāmiʿah pg. 305-314)
388
Shaykh Abūl Ḥasan Sindhī Al-Kabīr v, who wrote a marginalia for the
Ṣiḥaḥ Sittah and gave lessons in the Ḥaram for some time, was from
among his students. According to one opinion, he passed away in 1139
A.H.
389
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS QUSHĀSHĪ ٰ
Shaykh Aḥmad ibn Muḥammad Al-Qushashī Al-Mālikī Al-Madnī v
Date of Death: 1071 A.H
Age: 81 years
Aḥmad ibn Muḥammad ibn Yūnus ibn Aḥmad ibn ʿAlī ibn Yūsuf ibn
Ḥasan Al-Badrī Al- Qushāshī Al-Mālikī Al-Madnī. His lineage from his
father’s side reaches back to Sayyidunā ʿAlī z and to Sayyidunā Tamīm
Ad-Dārī z through his mother. He was born in 991 A.H. Initially, his
father, Muḥammad ibn Yūnus Qushāshī v taught him the Malikī fiqh, as
he had chosen the Malikī school of thought following his Shaykh,
Muḥammad ibn ʿIsā Tilmasānī v.
In 1011 A.H he happened to travel to Yemen with his father. From

amongst the ʿulamāʿ in Yemen he benefitted from Shaykh Amīn
Marāwaḥī, Muḥammad Ghurb, Shaykh Aḥmad Saṭiḥah Dhaylaʿī and
others ‫رحمهم هللا‬. Then, he travelled from Yemen to Makkah Muʿaẓẓamah
and stayed there for a while. During this time, he benefitted from the
company of Shaykh Abūl Ghayth Shajar v and Shaykh Sulṭān Majdhūb
v.
On arriving in Madīnah Munawwarah, he benefitted from Shaykh

Aḥmad ibnul Faḍl, Shaykh Muḥammad ibn ʿIrāq, Shaykh ʿUmar ibn
Quṭb and Shaykh Badr-ud-Dīn ʿĀdatī and others ‫رحمهم هللا‬. Eventually he
chose the company of Shaykh Aḥmad ibn ʿAlī Shināwī v. He completed
the study of Ḥadīth by him and married his daughter.
When Shaykh Shināwī v passed away, he chose the company of his

friend, Sayyīd Asʿad Balkhī and benefitted from him. Shaykh Qushāshī
v obtained ijāzah (authorisation) of dhikr and talqīn from
approximately 100 Shuyūkh. His great-grandfather, Shaykh Aḥmad
Dijānī v was also a saint of high status. Shaykh ʿAbdul Wahāb Shʿarānī
v mentioned him in Ṭabaqāt. Dijānī is the name of a village in Baytul
390
Muqaddas. From this, it is known that the family of Qushāshī was

originally the residents of Quds.
The reason why Qushāshī was called Qushāshī: in order to hide his
lineage, he sold ‘qushāshā’, which is old stock and old clothes etc.
He also received the mantle of khilāfah from his father and had the
good fortune of attaining success and acceptance on the hands of
Shaykh Shināwī v and he ascribed himself to him.
He spoke and dealt with each person according to his status. He used to
specifically honour the leaders of the tribe more. He enjoined good and
forbade evil in the most soft and gentle manner and would not return
anyone coming to him without advising him. Shaykh ʿIsā Maghribī v
said: “Whenever I depart from Qushāshī, the world becomes the most
despicable thing to me and I see myself disgraced, even though I did
not go by him very often.”
Students: from among his students Sayyīd ʿĀrif Billāh ʿAbdur Raḥmān
Maghribī Idrīsī, Shaykh ʿIsā Maghribī Jaʿafarī, Sayyīd ʿAbdullāh Bāfaqīh
and Shaykh Ibrāhīm ibn Ḥasan Kawrānī ‫ رحمهم هللا‬are famous.
Books: He authored twelve (12) books. The most famous of them is

“As-Simṭul Majīd Fī Talqīnidh Dhikr wal Bayʿatī wa lbāsil Khirqati wa
Salāsil Ahlit Tawḥid” which has been published in Hyderabad, India.
He passed away in 1071 A.H in Madīnah Munawwarah and is buried in

Baqīʿ in the shrine of Ḥalīmah Sāʿdiyyah.‫( رحمه هللا رحمة واسعة‬Extracted from
Fawāʿid Jāmiʿah from ʿUjālah Nafiʿah, pg. 314-319)
391
392
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS SHINĀWĪ ٰ
Shaykh Aḥmad ibn ʿAlī Ash Shināwī al Miṣrī Then Madnī v
Birth: 975 A.H.
Death: 1028 A.H.
Age: 53 years
He was born in Rawḥ, a village in Egypt in 975 A.H. His grandfather,

Muḥammad ibn Aḥmad Quṭb v was from among the giant awliyāʾ. He
was the Shaykh of Shaykh Abdul Wahhāb Shaʿrānī v. He was buried in
Rawḥ.
Shaykh Aḥmad Shināwī v was educated within Egypt from his

honourable father, Shaykh ʿAbdul Quddūs Shināwī v. He studied Ḥadīth
and also received the khirqah (mantle) of khilāfah. He also benefitted
from Muḥaddith Shamsuddīn Muḥammad ibn Aḥmad Ramlī, Sayyid
Ghaḍunfur ibn Jaʿfar Bukhārī then Madnī, Quṭb-ud-Dīn Muḥammad ibn
Abil Ḥasan Bakrī, Shaykh Ḥasan Wanjihī and Shaykh ʿAbdur Raḥmān
ibn ʿAbdul Qādir ibn Fahd ‫رحمهم هللا‬.
Thereafter, on arriving in Madīnah Munawwarah, he studied taṣawwuf

from Sayyid Ṣibghatullāh ibn Rūḥullāh Sindī and he completed
studying the knowledge of ṭarīqah. He also received the mantle of
khilāfah from him and he reached a very lofty rank. He became his
khalīfah in the upbringing of his students.
Shaykh Shināwī v was a combination (of the knowledge) of both

sharīʿah and ṭarīqah. He was very famous in the Ḥaramayn Sharīfayn.
His khalīfahs are in every province and they hold very high statuses.
Shināwī is ascribed to the village, Shinnū which is located in the

western part of Egypt. He was born in Rawḥ, a neighbourhood of this
village.
Students
393
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS SHINĀWĪ ٰ
The most famous from amongst his students who received his sanad
and benefitted from him are: Sayyid Sālim ibn Aḥmad Shaykhān,
Muḥammad ʿUmar ibn Ḥabshī Ghurābī, Shaykh Ṣafiyuddīn Aḥmad ibn
Muḥammad Dijānī Qushāshī ‫رحمهم هللا‬.
Death
He passed away in Madīnah Munawwarah on 8th Dhul Ḥijjah 1028 A.H.

He is buried in Baqīʿ Gharqad beside his Shaykh Ṣibghatullāh Sindī v.
Noteworthy point
The following is a very beneficial point of the aforementioned:

According to the muḥaddithīn, a chain with the least links is classified
as the highest chain. This is because when there are less narrators, the
grading and investigating (of the sanad) becomes easier. However,
having many narrators in the chain of ṭarīqah is a means for developing
more zuhd (asceticism) and taqwā (Allāh consciousness) and indicates
towards the greatness of this chain.
Books: Seventeen of his books have been mentioned in “Fawāʾid

Makkiyah”. (See: Fawāʾid Makkiyah pg. 319-322)
394
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS RAMALĪ ٰ
Shaykh Shamsud Dīn Muḥammad ibn Aḥmad ibn Ḥamzah Ar-Ramalī

Al-Manūfī Al-Miṣrī Ash Shāfiʿī v
Birth: 919 A.H. Jumād-al-ʾŪlā
Death: 1004 A.H. Jumād-al-ʾŪlā
Age: 85 years
This respected Shaykh was born in Jumād-al-ʿŪlā 919 A.H. in Menoufia,

Egypt. Firstly, he memorized the Qurʾān and then he learnt Bihjaa – (a
fiqh book) among other books. He acquired all his education from his
honuorable father, Shaykh Aḥmad Ramlī v. He also acquired a sanad in
Ḥadīth (chain of narration) from Shaykhul Islām Zakariyyā Anṣārī v
and Shaykh Burhānuddīn ibn Abī Sharīf v. The historian, Najm Ghazī
writes that he was also given ijāzah (authorisation) to narrate Ḥadīth
from Shaykhul Islām Aḥmad ibn Najjār Ḥanbalī, Shaykhul Islām Yaḥyā
Damīrī Mālikī, Shaykhul Islām Ṭarābilisī Ḥanafī and Shaykh Saʿdud Dīn
Dhahabī Shāfiʿī ‫رحمهم هللا‬. Allāh l had blessed him with a good memory,
understanding, knowledge and the ability to practice on this
knowledge.
Shaykh Abdul Wahāb Shaʿrānī v wrote in “Ṭabaqātul Wusṭā”: “I was

with him from the time I would lift him on my shoulders, until the
present. I never saw any such thing from him which would negatively
affect his Dīn. Even as a child he would not play with the children,
rather he grew up with Dīn, taqwā, care, chastity and purity. His father
gave him the best of upbringing. When I took him in my lap, I was
studying by his father at Madrasah Nāṣiriyyah. Signs of righteousness,
taqwā and goodness could be seen in him since then. Allāh made his
hopes and expectations a reality and cooled the eyes of those who
loved him. Accordingly, currently (i.e., when ʿAbdul Wahāb was writing
the biography of Shaykh Shamsud Dīn), he is the central figure in Egypt
with regards to issuing fatāwā, and there is a consensus of the people
395
of Egypt regarding his religiosity. With the praises and blessings of

Allāh, he is advancing further in this regard.”
After the death of his father, he continued teaching his classes and
taught Ḥadīth, fiqh and tafsīr. The special students of his father, like
Nāṣirud Dīn Ṭablāwī and Shihābud Dīn Aḥmad, who were considered
the great ʿulamāʾ of that era, would participate in his class circles for
the purpose of benefit.
He was the principal of a few madāris and was also appointed as the
head of the Shāfiʿīyyah Dārul Iftāʾ. Due to his great services, Shaykh
Shallī v included him among the mujaddidīn.
Death: Sunday 13th Jumād-al-ʾŪlā 1004 A.H. in Egypt.
Ramlah: Ramlah is a small neighbourhood near Munyatul ʿAṭār in

Egypt. There is also a Ramlah in Syria1 which is connected to Egypt.
(Fawāʾid Jāmiʿah pg. 326-328)
The leader of Ramlah, Syria selected [aḥādīth] from “Sunan Kubrā” and
told Imām Nasāʾī v to write the “Sunan Ṣughrā- Mujtabā”, which Imām
Nasāʾī v completed. It is correct that the full “Sunan Ṣughrā” was
completed by Imām Nasāʾī v, because the leader of Ramlah requested
that only the ṣaḥīḥ ḥadīth be compiled.
1The Ramlah of Syria is in Palestine, near Lud. We visited it. The grave of
Imām Nasāʾī v is here. It is written with a glorious pen. Fazl.
396
397
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS ZAKARIYYĀ ANṢĀRĪ ٰ
Shaykhul Islām Zaynud Dīn Zakariyyā ibn Muḥammad ibn Aḥmad Al

Anṣārī Ash Shāfiʿī v
Birth: 823 A.H.
Death: Around 924 or 926 A.H.
Age: 101 or 103 years
He was born in the year 823 A.H. in a small village in Egypt called
Sunaykah where he acquired his early education. He memorized the
Qurʾān Majīd and in terms of fiqh, he memorised “Mukhtaṣar Tabrīzī”
and a few parts of “ʿUmdatul Aḥkām”. He went to Cairo in 841 A.H. He
stayed there for some time and then departed. He thereafter returned
and occupied himself with studying Islāmic knowledge in Jāmiʿ Azhar.
He said: “I used to remain hungry for most of the time I spent in Jāmiʿ
Azhar. I would come out at night and find watermelon skins, hide and
eat them. A few years passed in this manner. Thereafter, Allāhlsent a
man to me who inquired of my condition. He became responsible for
providing me with food and drink and he said: “You should not conceal
your conditions from me. Whenever you call me, I will come.” A few
years passed in this manner. One night he came to me, took hold of my
hand and said: “Stand up and walk with me.” He took me to the stairs of
Jāmiʿ Azhar and said: “Climb these stairs.” I climbed them. He told me
to climb some more, and I continued to climb until I reached the top.
Thereafter, he said come down, so I came down. He said: “Zakariyyā!
You will die after all your companions. A time will come when you
attain the position of Shaykhul Islām and your students will also
become Shaykhul Islām. At this time, you will become blind.” Then, he
went away and I never saw him again.”
He completed the study of fiqh, Ḥadīth, uṣūl and adab under the
renowned scholars of his time. He received ijāzah (authorisation) to
narrate Ḥadīth from approximately one hundred and fifty of his
teachers and he kept count of them, name by name in his records. He
398
also received ijāzah to work in the field of iftāʾ and teaching from
hundreds of scholars.
From amongst his teachers, there are also some famous ones such as
Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar ʿAsqalānī (death:852 A.H.) v and Ibn Hummām Kamāl-
ud-Dīn Ḥanafī (death: 861 AH) v.
After completing his Islāmic studies, he took up the occupation of

teaching. He was appointed as the chief justice and would receive three
thousand (3000) dirhams daily. After this, he was given many
esteemed and distinguished positions. He was appointed to teach at
the madrasah by the mausoleum of Imām Shāfiʿī v which was regarded
as the greatest accomplishment in that era. He was also appointed as
the head teacher in Madrasah Rafīʿah and Madrasah Khānqāh Ṣūfīyyah.
He was appointed as the chief justice in 886 A.H. and he remained in
this position for twenty years. When his eyesight began to weaken, he
was removed from these positions.
Allāh l blessed him in everything: ʿilm and ʿamal (knowledge and

practice), wealth and age. Just as Allāh l gave him generously, he also
spent in the path of Allāh with an open heart. ʿAllāmah Shaʿrānī v said:
“I have never seen anyone who gave more charity than him. He would
give it in such a hidden manner that those who were around him would
not even be aware. There was a fixed amount which he used to give
daily or monthly to some of the needy ones.”
Shaykh was older than a hundred years. However, even after reaching
this age, there was no difference in his maʿmūlāt. Even when sick, he
would perform optional ṣalāh standing. Shaʿrānī v said: “Whenever I
would sit with him, I would feel that I am sitting with a pious, ʿārif
(conscious) king. The greatest scholars of Egypt were like children in
front of him.”
399
According to ʿĪd Rūsī, he passed away on 3rd Dhul Qaʿdah 926 A.H.
Thousands of students benefited from him. Forty-two of his books has
been mentioned in “Fawāʾid Jāmiʿah”.1 (See Fawāʾid -Jāmiʿah pg. 343-349)
1If Shaykh Zakariyyā v did pass away in 926 A.H., then at that time his student
Shaykh Ramlī’s was only seven years old. If he passed away in 924 A.H., then
Shaykh Ramlī was only five years old.‫ فليحرر‬Fazlur Rahman
400
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS IBN ḤAJAR ٰ
Ḥāfiẓ Abul Faḍl Shihābud Dīn Aḥmad ibn ʿAlī ibn Muḥammad ibn ʿAlī ibn
Aḥmad Al Asqalānī then Al Qāhirī Ash Shāfiʿī-
Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar v
Birth: Shāʿbān 773 A.H.
Death: Dhul Qaʿdah 852 A.H.
Age: 79 years
He was born in Shaʿbān 773 AH. At the age of four, his father’s shadow
was lifted. His mother had passed away before this. He started studying
at the age of five, memorized the Qurʾān Majīd at the age of nine. He
started reciting Qurʾān in tarāwīḥ from the age of twelve. During this
same year, he went for ḥajj with his guardian who was a great Egyptian
merchant. He stayed in the Ḥaram for one year and heard Ṣaḥīḥ
Bukhārī from Shaykh ʿAfīfuddīn Nashāwarī Musnid-e-Ḥijāz. He also
took ijāzah (authorisation) to narrate his other narrations. After this,
he started memorizing Mukhtaṣarāt ʿUlūm. He then developed an
interest in history and preoccupied himself in studying the conditions
of the narrators.
In 792 A.H., he focused on studying the sciences of adab (literature)

and wrote poems in praise of the Messenger of Allāh n. In 796 A.H., he
met the Ḥāfiẓ of his time, Shaykh Zaynuddīn ʿIrāqī v, and benefited
from staying in his company for ten years. Then, he became
preoccupied in studying Ḥadīth, and he remained in this field until the
end of his life. He compiled one hundred (100) ʿushāriyyāt with the
sanad of his teacher, Musnad Qāhirah, Shaykh Abū Isḥāq Tanūkhī v.
Thereafter, he travelled to Alexandria and received ijāzah to narrate
Ḥadīth from the scholars of this city. Thereafter, he also heard Ḥadīth
in Makkah, Madīnah Munawwarah, Zabīd, Taʿiz (a great fort from
among the famous forts of Yemen) (Muʿjamul Buldān 2/34) ʿAdnān etc. In
Yemen, he benefited from the Imām of languages, Majd-ud-Dīn Fayroz
Ābādī, the author of “Qāmūs” and other prominent scholars. He then
returned to Cairo.
401
He then went to Syria and benefitted from the scholars of that era from
Quṭayyah, Gaza, Ramlah, Quds, and Damascus etc. He stayed one
hundred days in Damascus and heard one thousand volumes [of
ḥadīth]. Amongst them were kitābs like: “Muʿjamul Awsaṭ” by
Ṭabarānī, “Maʿrifatus Ṣaḥābah” of Ibn Mundah and “Musnad Abī Yaʿlā”.
On returning, he wrote “Taghlīqut Taʿlīq” and he sought ijāzah by
staying in the company of Bulqīnī v. Ḥāfiẓ ʿIrāqī v also gave him ijāzah.
He therefore became occupied in writing and compiling. In 808 A.H., he
conducted a dictation of “Arbaʿīn Mutabāyinah”. He dictated
“ʿUshāriyātus Ṣaḥābah” in one hundred (100) sittings. He then started
teaching and dictating in Madrasah Jamāliyah. He stopped teaching in
814 A.H., and he then busied himself with writing and compiling. He
was appointed as the judge on 27th Muḥarram 827 A.H. and then in
Ṣafar the sequence of dictation began. (This is extracted from the
autobiography of Ḥāfiẓ.)
He was appointed as a lecturer in Jāmiʿ Azhar in 819 A.H. He heard

Ṣaḥī.Bukhārī, Sunan Nasāʾī, Jāmiʿ Tirmidhī, Muwaṭṭāʾ Mālik, Sunan
Dārimī and Ṣaḥīḥ Ibn Ḥibbān from Abū Isḥāq Tanūkhī v. In this way,
Ḥāfiẓ v reached such a rank in the science of Ḥadīth that even his
teachers acknowledged it. Ḥāfiẓ ʿIrāqī v suggested three names to be
his successors: “Ibn Ḥajar, my son Abū Zurʿah and then Haythamī.”
Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar v attained a very distinguished rank in the fields of

asmāʾ rijāl and memorization of Ḥadīth, but not in the jurisprudence of
the Ḥadīth. In the jurisprudence of the Ḥadīth, the position of Khaṭṭābī
v and Nawawī v is higher. In this field, Ḥāfiẓ v simply quotes
narrations. (Kashmīrī v mentions this.)
The ʿulamāʾ complain that Ḥāfiẓ v did not act justly with the
biographies of the ʿulamāʾ. Baqāʾī, Sakhāwī and Ḥājī Khalīfah ‫رحمهم‬
‫هللا‬made this complaint especially with regards to the aḥnāf.
Death: In Dhul Ḥijjah 852 A.H. after suffering from dysentery for one
month, he passed away. ‫رحمه هللا رحمة واسعة‬. The journalists wrote very
402
highly regarding Ḥāfiẓ when paying tribute to him. (Fawāʾid-e-Jāmiʿah pg.

437-443)
According to Suyūṭī v, Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar v authored one hundred and

eighty-six (186) books. (Ẓufrul Muḥaṣṣilīn pg. 186)
403
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS TANŪKHĪ ٰ
Shaykh Zayn-ud-Dīn Ibrāhīm ibn Aḥmad Tanūkhī

Abū Isḥāq Burhānud-Dīn v
Birth: 709 A.H.
Death: 800 A.H.
Age: 91
Shaykh Burhānud Dīn Tanūkhī (Tanūkh is a tribe from Arab or Yemen
– (Lisānul ʿArab 3/10)) was born in 709 A.H. and was raised and educated
in Damascus. He studied qirāʿah, fiqh and Ḥadīth with the scholars of
his time. He studied Ḥadīth from more than four hundred teachers. He
achieved such a high level of excellence in the field of Ḥadīth to the
extent that some of his teachers even narrated from him. Even though
Ḥāfiẓ Dhahabī v was his teacher, he heard a portion (of Ḥadīth) from
him. Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar v clarified this in “Durare Kāminah”. He also wrote
that he was an accepted imām of qirāʿah and asnād amongst the people
of Egypt. (Durare Kāminah 1/11)
In the end of his life, he became very blunt in his speech and his
eyesight was also fading due to which he became known by the title,
‘Burhānush Shāmī uḍ Ḍarīr’.
Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar v has written: “I was very fortunate to stay with him for
some time. I benefitted from him greatly. I heard many books, big and
small from him. He also supplicated for me, the effects of which are still
felt.”
Death: He passed away on 8th Jūmadal ʿŪlā, 800 A.H. (Fawāʾid Jāmiah pg.
443-445)
404
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS IBN SHAḤNAH ٰ
Shaykh Aḥmad ibn Abī Ṭālib al Ḥajjār Abul ʿAbbās, Shihābud Dīn
Ibn Shaḥnah v
Birth: Before 624 A.H.
Death: Ṣafar 730 A.H
Age: 106 years
He was born before 624 A.H. He heard Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī from muḥaddith
Zabīdī v who was in Damascus, Qādisiyyah in the year 630 A.H. He
heard Ḥadīth from many prominent muḥaddithīn of that era such as
Ibnul Latī, Qaṭīʿī, Ibn Rawzbah and Jaʿfar ibn ʿAlī ‫رحمهم هللا‬. He then started
teaching Ḥadīth. He lived for very long due to which grandsons were
present alongside grandfathers in the sanad. He was also able to hear
Ḥadīth from muḥaddith Ibn Latī v in 706 A.H. His name is also found in
the list of those who heard Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī from Ibn Zabīdī v. Thus, the
muḥaddithīn became extraordinarily happy.
He taught Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī approximately seventy (70) times in

Damascus, Cairo, Ḥamāt, Baalbek (Baʿlabakka), Ḥimṣ and other places.
He earned lots of honour and respect throughout his life.
He was very religious, righteous, punctual in performing ṣalāh with

jamāʿah (congregation) and he would also observe optional fasts
although he was one hundred (100) years old.
Ibn Kathīr v said: “It is established that he heard from Zabīdī and Ibn
Latī. He heard Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī from Zabīdī in 630 A.H. He narrated
Ḥadīth in Jāmiʿ Damascus on 9th Ṣafar 730 A.H. and we heard from him
during this period.”
Ibn Ḥajar v said: “The ḥuffāẓ of Ḥadīth would rush and travel to him
from city to city until they reached him. From 717 A.H. until his death,
throngs of people gathered around him. When he passed away, the
chains of the people became one level lower.”
405
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS IBN SHAḤNAH ٰ
Ibn Kathīr v said: “For twenty-five years, he lived in Muqaddamul

Ḥajjār. For this reason, he is known as Ḥajjār. In the end, he chose the
profession of tailoring.”
Death: On Monday, 25th Ṣafar 730 A.H at ʿAṣr time, his soul flew from
this worldly prison. His janāzah ṣalāh was performed in Muẓaffarī and
he was buried in Khānqah Rūmī near Jāmiʿal Akhram. ‫رحمه هللا رحمة واسعة‬.
(Fawāʾid Jāmiʿah pg. 445-449)
Note: At the time of hearing from Zabīdī v, Ḥajjār was most probably
more than six years old.1
1Ḥajjār and Zabīdī ‫ رحمهما هللا‬are both Ḥanafīs. (Al-ʿAnāqīd Al-Ghāliyah page 145)
Zabīd is [pronounced] like amīr. (Tājul ʿUrūs 2/361)
406
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS ḤUSAYN ZABĪDĪ ٰ
Shaykh Sirājud Dīn Ḥusayn ibn Mubārak Zabīdī Baghdādī Ḥanafī v
Birth: 545 or 546 A.H.
Death: Ṣafar 631 A.H.
Age: 85 or 86 years
Name and Lineage
Ḥusaynul Mubārak ibn Muḥammad ibn Yaḥyā ibn ʿAlī ibn Muslim ibn
Mūsā ibn ʿImrān Ar-Rabīʿī. He was originally a Zabīdī. He later became
a Baghdādī. (Zabīd is a city in Yemen on the seashore.)
He is the grandson of the famous ascetic, Shaykh Muḥammad ibn Yaḥyā

Zabīdī v. He was born in 545 or 546 A.H. At first, he learnt the Holy
Qurʾān and its various modes of qirāʿah. Thereafter, he acquired
knowledge in other fields. He studied fiqh and Ḥadīth from his
grandfather, Shaykh Abul Waqt, Abu Zarʿah and Abū Zayd Ḥumaydī v
and he developed a deep insight [in these subjects]. He thereafter
began conducting classes of Ḥadīth in the madrasah of Wazīr Abul
Muẓaffar Hubayrah v. He was a far-sighted scholar with regards to the
different fiqhī madhāhib and was amongst the reliable scholars of
narrations.
The aforementioned attained a high level of proficiency in adab

(literature). He was a faqīh, an accomplished and virtuous scholar,
religious, pious, humble and he had a good character. He conducted
classes of Ḥadīth in Baghdād, Damāscus, Ḥalab and other cities. Many
people heard [Ḥadīth] from him. Many ḥuffaẓ are also among them. For
example: Dabīthī and Ḍiyāʾ-ud-Dīn. The last person to narrate from him
was Ḥajjār Ṣāliḥī v who heard Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī etc. from him. The names
of his teachers have also been recorded. He passed away on 23 rd Ṣafar
631 A.H. and is buried in Jāmiʿ Manṣūr, Baghdād. His book, “Al-
Balghah” is famous in the field of fiqh. (Fawāʾid Jāmiʿah pg. 450)
407
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS ḤUSAYN ZABĪDĪ ٰ
408
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS ABUL WAQT SIJZĪٰ
Shaykh Abul Waqt ʿAbdul Awwal ibn ʿĪsā ibn Shuʿayb Sijzī Harwī v
Birth: 458 A.H.
Death: 553 A.H.
Age: 95 years
This respected Shaykh was born in 458 A.H. and he was raised and
educated in Hirāt. His father, Abū ʿAbudullāh ʿĪsā lived for over a
hundred years and he was alone in narrating from Muḥaddith ʿAlī ibn
Bishrī v. He would lift him on his shoulders and take him to Bowshanj
where he heard Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī, Musnad Dārimī, Muntakhab ʿAbd ibn
Ḥumayd etc. in 465 A.H. from Muḥaddith Jalālud Dīn Dāwudī v and
others. (Bowshanj is a city in the surrounding areas of Ḥirāt.)
Amongst the aforementioned teachers of Ḥadīth, Abū ʿĀṣim al Faḍl v

and Shaykhul Islām ʿAbdullāh Anṣārī’s v names are at the top of the
list. He remained in the company of Shaykhul Islām Abū Ismāʿīl
ʿAbdullāh Anṣārī v for more than twenty years.
He attained such authority in narrating Ḥadīth which was not attained

by any of his contemporaries. He lived for a long time. Thus, the young
and old were connected in the sanad through him. He was a person of
sound opinions and presence of mind. He was very pious and humble.
Upon reaching Baghdād, his physical health deteriorated.
He travelled to Baṣrah, ʿIrāq and Ḥijāz and he benefitted from the

ʿulamāʾ of these places. He was consistent in performing tahajjud and
engaging in dhikr. He was a person who would weep and cry profusely
and he was a remnant of the pious predecessors. He was consistent
and steadfast with regards to qirāʿah (i.e., the recitation of the Qurʾān).
Sijzī: It refers to one who is related to Sijistān. It does not follow the
rules of relative nouns (ghayr qiyāsī).
Death:
409
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS ABUL WAQT SIJZĪٰ
6th Dhul Qaʾdah 553 A.H. at the age of 95 while he was preparing for the
journey of ḥajj. He was reciting the following verse at the time of his
death:
﴾‫﴿يا ليت قومي يعلمون بما غفر لي ربي وجعلني من المكرمين‬
I wish my people could know of how my Lord has forgiven me and

included me amongst the honoured. (Fawāʾid Jāmiʿah pg. 452)
410
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS BAWSHANJĪٰ
Shaykh ʿAbdur Raḥmān ibn Muḥammad Al Bawshanjī Ad Dāwudī v
Birth: 374 A.H.
Death: 467 A.H.
Age: 94 years
He was born in Rabīʿ-ul-Awwal 374 A.H. He studied literature from Abū

ʿAlī Fajrawī v. He studied fiqh in Nayshāpūr, Baghdād and Bawshanj
from Abū Bakr Qafāl Marwazī, Abū Ṭayyib Sahl Ṣaʿlūkī, Abū Ḥāmid
Asfarāʾinī and Faqīh Abū Saʿīd Baḥr ibn Manṣūr‫رحمهم هللا‬. He acquired the
knowledge of taṣawwuf from Abū ʿAbdur Raḥmān Sulamī v and
benefitted greatly from his company.
He heard Ḥadīth from Muḥaddith Abul Ḥasan ibnuṣ Ṣalt v in Baghdād,

Abū ʿAbdullāh Al-Ḥāfiẓ v in Nayshāpūr and Abū Muḥammad ibn Abī
Shurayh v and others in Bawshanj. He then busied himself in studying
and teaching, writing, compiling and in advising and propagating the
message of Islām to others. He was a great dhākir (one who engages in
abundance of dhikr) and shāghil (constantly occupied in worship).
The aforementioned is called “Dāwudī” by being ascribed to his

forefather, Dāwūd ibn Aḥmad v. He was the head of the scholars of
Khurāsān. Let alone the surroundings of Bawshanj, amongst the people
of Khurāsān, his virtue and excellence, character and taqwā was
known. He attained a lofty rank in taṣawwuf. Abul Ḥasan Musāfir ibn
Muḥammad ibn ʿAlī Busṭāmī Nayshāpūrī, Abū Muḥammad ibn
Muḥammad Busṭāmī Nayshāpūrī, Abul Waqt ʿAbdul Awwal ibn ʿĪsā
Sijzī Harwī, Abul Muḥāsin Asʿad ibn ʿAlī Ḥanafī and Ummul Faḍl
ʿĀʾishāh bint Abī Bakr ibn Baḥr Balkhī and others ‫ رحمهم هللا‬were amongst
his students. Asʿad ibn ʿAlī recited this poem regarding him:
‫وهن مذموم ومحمود‬ ‫ائمة العلم جربتهم‬
‫فخير ورع ورع داؤد‬ ‫سيرة داؤد وهم خيرهم‬
411
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS BAWSHANJĪٰ
Dhahabī v writes that there are many narrations from Shaykh Abū
Muhḥmmad ibn Ḥammuwiyah v and this is the last muḥaddith who
narrated from him directly without any link.
One day, the governor came in his presence. So, the Shaykh advised
him: “Allāh l has given you authority over his slaves, so beware! How
you will answer when He asks you about them.”
The following are two poems from amongst his excellent poetry:
‫ذهب النور وا ْدلَ َه َّم الظالم‬ ‫كان في اَلجتماع بالناس نور‬
‫فعلى الناس والزمان سالم‬ ‫فسد الناس والزمان جميعا‬
It is narrated that from the time the Turks plundered Khurāsān, he did
not eat meat for forty years (out of caution that perhaps it may be meat
from a stolen animal). He lived on fish alone. Thereafter, when he was
informed that their leaders ate food on the bank of the river where the
fish were caught and they threw the remaining food into the river, he
also stopped eating fish from this day.
He departed from this world in Shawwāl 467 A.H. at the age of ninety-
four and is buried in Bawshanj. (Fawāʾid Jāmiʿah pg. 453-456)
412
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS IBN ḤAMMUWIYAHٰ
Shaykh ʿAbdullāh ibn Aḥmad ibn Ḥammuwiyah ibn Yūsuf ibn Aʿyun
As-Sarakhsī v
Birth: 293 A.H.
Death: 381 A.H.
Age: 88 years
He was born in 293 A.H. and he heard Ḥadīth from the senior
muḥaddithīn of that era. He was from the distinguished students of
Firabrī and was a famous narrator of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī. Dhahabī
mentioned him with the title, Musnad Khurāsān.
He narrated Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī from Firabrī, Kitāb Dārimī from ʿĪsā ibn
ʿUmar Samarqandī and Musnad ʿAbdullāh ibn Ḥumayd and Tafsīr ʿAbd
ibn Ḥumayd from Ibrāhīm ibn Khuraym. He passed away at the age of
eighty in the month of Dhul Ḥijjah. (According to this calculation the
year of his death would be approximately 373 A.H.) (Fawāʾid Jāmiʿah pg.
456)
However, Shaykh Muḥammad Zakariyyā v recorded the year of death

as 381 A.H. (Muqaddamah Lāmiʿ pg. 71 and Tadrībur Rāwī 2/316 with the taḥqīq of
Shaykh Muḥammad ʿAwwāmah)
He heard Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī from Firabrī in 316 A.H. (Ibid)
413
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS FIRABRĪٰ
Shaykh Muḥammad Yūsuf ibn Maṭar ibn Ṣāliḥ ibn Bishr Firabrī
Shāfiʿī v
Birth: 231 A.H.
Death: 320 A.H
Age: 89 years
This Shaykh was born in 231 A.H. He acquired the knowledge of Dīn
and heard Ḥadīth from many excellent scholars. He heard Ḥadīth from
ʿAlī ibn Khashram in Firabar. According to some, he heard Ṣaḥīḥ
Bukhārī twice from Imām Bukhārī v - once in Firabar in 248 A.H. and
the second time in Bukhārā in 252 A.H.
Samʿānī v mentioned that he heard Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī from Imām Bukhārī

thrice: in 253, 254 and 255 A.H. Abū Zayd Qāshānī was the first to
narrate Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī from Firabrī and the last narrator was Abū ʿAlī
Ismāʿīl ibn Muḥammad ibn Aḥmad ibn Ḥājib Kasāʾī.
Ninety thousand ʿulamāʾ heard Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī from Imām Bukhārī, the
last being Firabrī, as has been mentioned by Ibn Khallakān and Shaykh
Muḥammad ibn Ṭāhir Patnī. (Ḥāfiẓ opposed this, as has been
mentioned earlier on page 76.)
The famous narrators of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī from Firabrī, as has been

mentioned by Sayyid Murtaḍā Balgharāmī are as follows: Abū Isḥāq
Ibrāhīm ibn Aḥmad Mustalmī, Abū Muḥammad ʿAbdullāh ibn Aḥmad
ibn Ḥamuwī Sarakhsī, Abul Haytham Muḥammad ibn Makkī
Kushmīhinī, Shaykh Muʿammar Abū Luqmān Yaḥyā ibn ʿAmmār ibn
Muqbil ibn Shāhān Khattalānī.
Death: He passed away at the age of eighty-nine on 3rd Shawwāl, 320

A.H. He was righteous, God fearing and reliable.
(Firabar: a small city, connected to Bukhārā on the banks of Jayḥūn.)

(Fawāʾid Jāmiʿah)
414
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS FIRABRĪٰ
It is narrated both ways: fā can have a fatḥah or a kasrah. Ibn Rushayd

gave preference to the fatḥah. It is written that: “The most correct is
with a fatḥah in terms of the place and lineage.”
(Ifādatun Naṣīḥ bit Taʿrīf bisanadil Jāmiʿ Ṣaḥīḥ pg. 11)
415
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS THE ḤANAFĪ NARRAATORS IN BUKHĀRĪ
The Following Ḥanafī Narrators Mentioned in Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī
Are the students of Imām Abū Ḥanīfah
# Names of narrators Takhrīj of

aḥādīth
1 Ibrāhīm ibn Saʿd ibn Ibrāhīm v (183 A.H.). He is the student 1/13,15,27
of Imām and the Shaykh of the Shūyūkh of Bukhārī
2 Ibrāhīm ibn Ṭahmān Al-Harawī An-Naysābūrī v (168 A.H.). 1/60,350

He is the student of Imām and the Shaykh of the Shūyūkh of
Bukhārī
3 Ibrāhīm ibn Muḥammad Abū Isḥāq Al-Fazārī Al-Kūfī v (185 1/128,292

A.H.). He is the student of Imām and the Shaykh of
Bukhārī’s Shaykh
4 Isbāṭ ibn Muḥammad Al-Qurashī Abū Muḥammad v (200 2/658

A.H.). He is the student of Imām and the Shaykh of the
Shūyūkh of Bukhārī
5 Isḥāq ibn Ibrāhīm ibn Rāhwiyyah Al-Ḥanafī v (238 A.H.). 1/18,487, 501
He narrated from Imām and from his students and he is the
Shaykh of Bukhārī.
6 Isḥāq ibn Yūsuf Al-Azraq Al-Qurashī Al-Wāsiṭī v (195 A.H.). 1/224,467

Bukhārī.
7 Isrāʾīl ibn Yūnus As-Sabīʿī Abū Yūsuf Al-Kūfī v (162 A.H.). 1/14,57,74
Bukhārī.
416
8 Ismāʿīl ibn Abān Al-Warrāq Al-Azdī Al-Kūfī v (261 A.H.). He 1/127,224

is the student of Imām and the Shaykh of Bukhārī.
9 Ismāʿīl ibn Abī Khālid Al-Bajlī Al-Aḥmasī Al-Kūfī v (145 1/13,17,19, 75

Shūyūkh of Bukhārī.
10 Ayyūb ibn Abī Tamīmah Sakhtiyānī Al-Baṣrī t (131 A.H.). 1/9,18,20

Bukhārī.
11 Bishr ibn Al-Mufaḍḍal Ar-Raqāshī Al-Baṣrī Al-ʿĀbid v (186 1/16,56,68

12 Jarīr ibn Ḥāzim Al-Azdī Al-Baṣrī v (170 A.H.). He is the 1/117,126,185

student of Imām and the Shaykh of the Shūyūkh of Bukhārī.
13 Jarīr ibn ʿAbdul Ḥamīd Aḍ-Ḍabbī Al-Kūfī Muḥaddith Ar-Rai 1/16,186

v (188 A.H.). He is the student of Imām and the Shaykh of
the Shūyūkh of Bukhārī.
14 Jaʿfar ibn ʿAwn Al-Makhzūmī Al-Kūfī v (206 A.H.). He is the 1/11,88,264

15 Ḥātim ibn Ismāʿīl Al-Kūfī Al-Madnī Al-Ḥārithī v (186 A.H.). 1/31,214, 250
Bukhārī.
16 Ḥusayn ibn ʿAlī Al-Juʿfī Al-Kūfī Az-Zāhid Al-Qudwah v (203 1/93,469

17 Ḥafṣ ibn Ghiyāth An-Nakhʿī Al-Kūfī v Qaḍī of Bagdād and 1/40,50

Kūfah. (194 A.H.). He is the student of Imām and the
Shaykh of the Shūyūkh of Bukhārī.
417
18 Ḥammād ibn Usāmah Abū Isḥāq Al-Kūfī v (201 A.H.). He is 1/123,126

the student of Imām and the Shaykh of the Shūyūkh of
Bukhārī.
19 Ḥammād ibn Zayd ibn Dirham Al-Azdī Al-Baṣrī Al-Azraq 1/9,21

Aḍ-Ḍarīr v (179 A.H.). He is the student of Imām and the
20 Ḥammād ibn Salamah ibn Dīnār Abū Salamah Al-Baṣrī Al- 1/102,232
Bazzāz v (167 A.H.). He is the student of Imām and the
21 Ḥanẓalah ibn Abī Sufyān Al-Makkī Al-Ḥāfiẓ v (151 A.H.). He 1/6,119

is the student of Imām and the Shaykh of the Shūyūkh of
Bukhārī.
22 Khālid ibn ʿAbdullāh Aṭ-Ṭaḥḥān Al-Wāsiṭī Al-Muzanī v (179 1/102,141

23 Khallād ibn Yaḥyā ibn Ṣafwān As-Sulamī Al-Kūfī v (213 1/63,64

Shūyūkh of Bukhārī. 2/927
24 Dāwūd ibn Rushayd Al-Khawārzimī Al-Hāshmī Abūl Faḍl v 2/993

(239 A.H.). He is the student of Imām and his Aṣḥāb and the
Shaykh of the Shaykh of Bukhārī.
25 Dāwūd ibn ʿAbdur Raḥmān Al-ʿAṭār Al-ʿAbdī Al-Makkī Abū 1/100

Sulaymān v (174 A.H.) He is the Shaykh and student of
Imām and the Shaykh of Bukhārī’s Shaykh.
26 Rawḥ ibn ʿUbādah Al-Qaysī Al-Baṣrī Abū Muḥammad v 1/12,52

(205 A.H.) He is the student of Imām and the Shaykh of the
27 Zāʾidah ibn Qudāmah Ath-Thaqafī Al-Kūfī Abū Ṣult v (161 1/41,81

418
28 Zakariyyā ibn Abī Zāʾidah Al-Wādiʿī Al-Kūfī Abū Yaḥyā v 1/13,33

(148 A.H.). He is the student of Imām and the Shaykh of the
29 Zuhayr ibn Muʿāwiyah Al-Juʿfī Al-Kūfī Abū Khaythamah 1/10,36

Muḥaddith Al-Jazīrah v (173 A.H.). He is the student of
Imām and the Shaykh of the Shūyūkh of Bukhārī.
30 Saʿīd ibn Abī ʿArūbah Mihrān Al-Baṣrī Al-ʿAdwī Abū Naḍr v 1/103,297
31 Sufyān ibn Saʿīd Al-Kūfī Abū ʿAbdullāh Ath-Thawrī v (161 1/119,122

32 Sufyān ibn ʿUyaynah Al-Hilālī Al-Kūfī Abū Muḥammad 1/16,17,22

Muḥaddith of Al-Ḥaram v (198 A.H.). He is the student of
33 Salām ibn Salīm Al-Kūfī Abūl Aḥwaṣ v (179 A.H.). He is the 1/104,134
34 Salām ibn Abī Muṭīʿ Al-Khuzāʿī Al-Baṣrī Abū Saʿīd v (164 2/943,757
35 Sulaymān ibn Ḥayyān Al-Kūfī Abū Khālid Al-Aḥmar v (190 1/61,262

36 Sulaymān ibn Ṭarkhān At-Taymī Al-Baṣrī Abūl Muʿtamar v 1/75,87

419
37 Sulaymān ibn Fayrūz Al-Kūfī Ash-Shaybānī Abū Isḥāq v 1/44,74

38 Shabābah ibn Sawwār Al-Fazārī Al-Madāʾinī Abū ʿUmar v 1/47,123

39 Shuʿbah ibn Al-Ḥajjāj Al-Azdī Al-Wāsiṭī Muḥaddith of 1/9,102

Baṣrah Abū Busṭām v (160 A.H.). He is the student of Imām
and the Shaykh of the Shūyūkh of Bukhārī.
40 Shaybān ibn ʿAbdur Raḥmān Abū Muʿāwiyah An-Naḥwī 1/21,22,30

Nazīlul Kūfah v (164 A.H.). He is the student of Imām and
the Shaykh of the Shūyūkh of Bukhārī.
41 Ḍaḥḥāk ibn Makhlad Abū ʿĀṣim An-Nabīl Al-Baṣrī v (212 1/6-125,250

A.H.). He is the student of Imām and the Shaykh of Bukhārī and other than
and his Shūyūkh. this
42 Ṭalaq ibn Ghunnām ibn Muʿāwiyah Al-Kūfī v (211 A.H.). He 2/686,702

is the student of Imām and the Shaykh of Bukhārī.
43 ʿAbbād ibn ʿAbbād ibn Ḥabīb Al-Baṣrī v (181 A.H.). He is 1/75, 2/1090
the student of Imām and the Shaykh of Bukhārī and the
44 ʿAbbād ibn Al-ʿAwwām Al-Kilābī Al-Wāsiṭī v (185 A.H.). He 1/29,291

Bukhārī.
45 ʿAbdul Hamid ibn Abdur Rahman Abū Yahya Al Ḥamānī Al- 2/775
Kūfī v (202 A.H.) He is the student of Imām and the Shaykh
of the Shūyūkh of Bukhārī.
420
46 ʿAbdur Raḥmān ibn Mahdī Al-Baṣrī Al-Luʾluʾī Al-ʿAnbarī v 1/56,133

47 ʿAbdur Razzāq ibn Hammām Aṣ-Ṣanʿānī Al-Ḥumayrī v (211 1/11,42

48 ʿAbdul ʿAzīz ibn Abī Ḥāzim Al-Madnī v (184 A.H.). He is the 1/63,64,71
49 ʿAbdul ʿAzīz ibn ʿAbdullāh ibn Abī Salamah Al-Mājishūn Al- 1/23,32
Madnī v (164 A.H.). He is the student of Imām and the
50 ʿAbdullāh ibn Idrīs ibn Yazīd Al-Kūfī v (192 A.H.). He is the 1/426
student of Imām and the Shaykh of the Shūyūkh of Bukhārī. 2/625,567
51 ʿAbdullāh ibn Dāwūd Al-Khuraybī Ash-Shuʿbī Al-Kūfī v 1/24,66

(312 A.H.). He is the student of Imām and the Shaykh of
Bukhārī.
52 ʿAbdullāh ibn ʿAwn ibn Arṭabān Al-Muznī Al-Baṣrī v (151 1/69,134

53 ʿAbdullāh ibn Mubārak Al-Ḥanẓalī Al-Marwazī At-Turkī Al- 1/2,33,36

Ab Al Khawārzimī Al-Um v. He is the student of Imām and
54 ʿAbdullāh ibn Numayr Al-Hamdānī Al-Kūfī Abū Hishām v 1/48,66

55 ʿAbdullāh ibn Yazīd Al-Muqrī Al-ʿAdwī Al-ʿUmrī Al-Makkī v 1/87,155
421

56 ʿAbdul Mālik ibn ʿAbdul ʿAzīz ibn Jurayj Al-Makkī v (150 1/43,57
57 ʿAbdul Wāḥid ibn Ziyād Al-Baṣrī v (186 A.H.). He is the 1/10,24,36

58 ʿAbdul Wārith ibn Saʿīd At-Taymī At-Tanūrī Al-Baṣrī v 1/17,18,21

59 ʿAbdah ibn Sulaymān Abū Muḥammad Al- Kūfī v (180 A.H.). 1/62,83,192
Bukhārī.
60 ʿUbaydullāh ibn ʿUmar ibn Ḥafṣ Al-ʿUmrī Al-ʿAdwī Al-Madnī 1/62,63,68

v (147 A.H.). He is the student of Imām and the Shaykh of
61 ʿUbaydullāh ibn Mūsā Al-Muqrī Al-ʿĀbid Al-Kūfī Al-ʿAbsī v 1/24,52

(213 A.H.), He is the student of Imām and the Shaykh of
Bukhārī and his Shaykh.
62 ʿUbaydah ibn Ḥumayd Aḍ-Ḍabbī At-Taymī Al-Kūfī v (190 1/894,945

63 ʿAlī ibn Jaʿd Al-Jawharī Al-Hāshimī v (230 A.H.). He is the 1/13,21

student of Imām and Imām Abū Yusuf and he is also
Bukhārī’s Shaykh.
422
64 ʿAlī ibn Mus-hir Qāḍī Al-Mawṣal Al-Kūfī v (189 A.H.). He is 1/44,73,146

Bukhārī.
65 ʿUmar ibn Ḥafṣ ibn Ghiyāth Al-Kūfī v (222 A.H.). He is the 1/40,50,73
student of Imām and he is also Bukhārī’s Shaykh.
66 ʿAmr ibn Dinār Abū Muḥammad Al-Makkī ʿĀlimul Ḥaram v 1/100,113,116

67 ʿIsā ibn Yūnus As-Sabīʿī Al-Kūfī v (187 A.H.). He is the 1/117,160,487

68 Faḍl ibn Dukīn Al-Malāʾī At-Tājirul Kūfī Abū Nuʿaym v (219 1/13,230,232
A.H.). He is the student of Imām and he is also Bukhārī’s
Shaykh.
69 Faḍl ibn Mūsā As-Sīnānī (a village in Marw) Al Marwazī 1/41,87,100

Abū ʿAbdullāh v (192 A.H.). He is the student of Imām and
70 Fuḍayl ibn Sulaymān An-Numayrī Al-Baṣrī v (186 A.H.). He 1/69,208, 233

Bukhārī.
71 Fuḍayl ibn ʿIyāḍ Al-Yarbūʿī Al-Marwazī Shaykh ul Ḥaram v 2/678,1100

72 Fuḍayl ibn Ghazwān Aḍ-Ḍabbī Al-Kūfī v (140 A.H.). He is 1/63,234,2/72

the student of Imām and the Shaykh of the Shūyūkh of 5
Bukhārī.
73 Qāsim ibn Mālik Al-Muznī Abū Jaʿfar Al-Kūfī v (190 A.H.). 1/250, 2/993
423
Bukhārī.
74 Qubayṣah ibn ʿUqbah ibn Muḥammad Al-Kūfī v (215 A.H.). 1/10,44,

He is the student of Imām and he is also Bukhārī’s Shaykh. 2/999
75 Layth ibn Saʿd Al-Miṣrī v Imām of Ḥadīth and Fiqh in Egypt 1/33,42,53
(175 A.H.). He is the student of Imām, his Shaykh and also
76 Mālik ibn Maghwal Al-Kūfī Abū ʿAbdullāh v (159 A.H.). He 1/390,503,

is the student of Imām and the Shaykh of the Shūyūkh of 2/602
Bukhārī.
77 Muḥammad ibn Bishr AlʿAbdī Al-Kūfī v (203 A.H.). He is 1/343,420,

the student of Imām and the Shaykh of the Shūyūkh of 520
Bukhārī.
78 Muḥammad ibn Al-Ḥasan ibn ʿImrān Al-Muzanī Al-Wāsiṭī v 1/14

(222 A.H.). He is the student of Imām and the Shaykh of
79 Muḥammad ibn Khāzim Abū Muʿāwiyah Aḍ-Ḍarīr Al-Kūfī v 1/24,35,36

80 Muḥammad ibn Sābiq At-Taymī Al-Kūfī, later as Baghdādī v 1/390,503

(213 A.H.). He is the student of Imām and he is also the
Shaykh of Bukhārī and his Shūyūkh.
81 Muḥammad ibn Salām Al-Baykandī v the Muḥaddith of 1/10,21,30

Bukhārā (225 A.H.). He is the student of Imām and also
82 Muḥammad ibn Abī ʿAdī Al-Baṣrī Muḥammad ibn Ibrāhīm v 1/98,210

424
83 Muḥammad ibn Fuḍayl ibn Ghazwān Al-Kūfī v (195 A.H.). 1/10,63,83

Bukhārī.
84 Muḥammad ibn Maymūn Abū Ḥamzah As-Sakrī Al-Marwazī 1/41,65,175

v (167 or 168 A.H.) He is the student of Imām and the
85 Makhlad ibn Yazīd Al-Qurshī Al-Ḥarrānī Abū Yaḥyā v (193 1/124,318,

A.H.). He is the student of Imām and the Shaykh of the 277
86 Marwān ibn Muʿāwiyah Al-Fazārī Al-Kūfī v (193 A.H.). He is 1/78,122, 251

Bukhārī.
87 Misʿar ibn Kidām Al-Hilālī Al-Kūfī v (153 or 155 A.H.). He is 1/33,63,106

Bukhārī.
88 Maʿāfi ibn ʿImrān Al-Mūṣilī Al-Azdī v (185 A.H.). He is the 1/138,531

89 Muʿallā ibn Manṣūr Rāzī v -settled in Baghdād (211 A.H.) 1/292,705

He is the student of Imām and his Aṣḥāb and the Shaykh of
90 Maʿmar ibn Rāshid Al-Baṣrī Al-Azdī v the ʿĀlim of Yemen 1/3,11,22,37

91 Mughīrah ibn Maqsam Aḍ-Ḍabbī Al-Kūfī Al-Aʿmā v (136 2/755,931

92 Makkī ibn Ibrāhīm At-Tamīmī Al-Ḥanẓalī Al-Balkhī v (215 1/21,71

A.H.). He is the student of Imām and the Shaykh of Bukahri.
425
(Eleven of the twenty-two thulāthiyyāt have been narrated

from him.)
93 Naḍr ibn Shumayl Al-Māznī Al-Baṣrī Al-Lughwī v, the ʿĀlim 1/30,329,

of Marw (203 A.H.). He is the student of Imām and the
Shaykh of the Shūyūkh of Bukhārī. 473
94 Nuʿaym ibn Ḥammād Al-Khuzāʿī Al-Marwazī Al-Farḍī Al- 1/56

Aʿwar v (228 A.H.). He is the student of Imām and the
95 Waḍḍāḥ ibn ʿAbdullāh Yashkurī Al-Wāsiṭī Al-Bazzār Abū 1/3,14,20

ʿAwānah v (176 A.H.). He is the student of Imām and the
96 Wakīʿ ibn Jarrāḥ Ar-Rawāsī Al-Kūfī Muḥaddith of ʿIrāq v 1/29,160

(196 A.H.). He is the student of Imām and issued fatāwā on
his opinions and he is also the Shaykh of the Shūyūkh of
Bukhārī.
97 Walīd ibn Muslim Abūl ʿAbbās Al-Amawī Al-Qurashī Ad- 1/79,127

Dimashqī v (194 A.H.). He is the student of Imām and the
98 Wahb ibn Jarīr Abūl ʿAbbās Al-Azdī Al-Amawī v (206 A.H.). 1/67,86
Bukhārī.
99 Wuhayb ibn Khālid Al-Bāhilī Al-Baṣrī Al-Karābīsī v (162 1/18,31

100 Hāshim ibn Al-Qāsim Abū Naḍr Al-Laythī Al-Khurāsānī Al- 1/451, 2/997
Baghdadī v (207 A.H.). He is the student of Imām and the
101 Hishām ibn Yūsuf Abū ʿAbdur Raḥmān Aṣ-Ṣanʿānī v (197 1/43,91
426
102 Hushaym ibn Bashīr Al-Wāsiṭī- resident of Baghdād v (186 1/48,58

103 Yaḥyā ibn Ādam Abū Zakariyyā Al-Qurashī Al-Aḥwal Al- 1/424,451
Kūfī v (203 A.H.). He is the student of Imām and the
104 Yaḥyā ibn Ayyūb Abūl ʿAbbās Al-Ghāfiqī Al-Miṣrī v (168 1/90,114
105 Yaḥyā ibn Zakariyyā ibn Abī Zāʾidah Al-Wādiʿī Al-Kūfī v 1/424,577
106 Yaḥyā ibn Saʿīd Al-Qaṭṭān At-Taymī Al-Baṣrī v (198 A.H.). 1/52,58,62
He is the student of Imām and issued fatāwā according to
his views and he is also the Shaykh of Bukhārī.
107 Yaḥyā ibn Sulaymān Al-Juʿfī Al-Kūfī Al-Muqrī v who resided 1/64,94,135
in Egypt (237 A.H.) He is the student of Imām and the
108 Yazīd ibn Zurayʿ Abū Muʿāwiyah Al-Baṣrī Al-ʿAyshī v (182 1/90,120, 106
109 Yazīd ibn Hārūn As-Sulmī Al-Wāsiṭī Abū Khālid v (206 1/27,30,55
110 Yūnus ibn Yazīd Al-Aylī v (152 A.H.) He is the student of 1/3,16,22
(More than
101)
427
428
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS THE FAMOUS AʾIMMAH MUJTAHIDĪN
The Birth and Death Years of the Famous Aʾimmah and ʿUlamāʾ Kirām
The Famous Aʾimmah Mujtahidīn
NAME BIRTH DEATH
Imām Aʿẓam Abū Ḥanīfah Nuʿmān ibn Thābit v 80 A.H. 150 A.H
Imām Abū Yūsuf Yaʿqūb ibn Ibrāhīm v 93 or 113 A.H. 182 A.H
Imām Muḥammad ibn Ḥasan Ash-Shaybānī v 132 A.H 189 A.H.
Imām Zufar v 110 A.H. 185 A.H.
Imām Mālik ibn Anas v 93 A.H. 179 A.H.
Imām Shāfiʿī Muḥammad ibn Idrīs v 150 A.H. 204 A.H
Imām Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal v 164 A.H. 241 A.H.
429
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS THE FAMOUS AʾIMMAH MUḤADDITHĪN
The Famous Aʾimmah Muḥaddithīn
NAME BIRTH DEATH
Imām Bukhārī Muḥammad ibn Ismāʿīl v 194 A.H. 256 A.H.
Imām Muslim ibn Al-Ḥajjaj Qushayrī v 204 A.H. 261 A.H.
Imām Abū Dāwūd Sulaymān ibn Ashʿath Sijistānī v 202 A.H. 275 A.H.
Imām Abū ʿIsā Muḥammad ibn ʿIsā Tirmidhī v 209 A.H. 279 A.H.
Imām Abū ʿAbdur Raḥmān Aḥmad ibn ʿAlī Nasāʾī v 215 A.H. 303 A.H.
Imām Muḥammad ibn Yazīd ibn Mājah Qazwīnī v 209 A.H. 273 A.H.
Imām Tahāwī Aḥmad ibn Salāmah v 229 A.H. 321 A.H.
430
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS SOME FAMOUS ʿULAMĀʾ
Some Famous ʿUlamāʾ
NAME BIRTH DEATH
Ismāʿīlī (Abū Bakr Aḥmad ibn Ibrāhīm) v 297 A.H. 371 A.H.
Ibn Ḥibban Muḥammad Abū Ḥātim Bastī v 270 A.H. 354 A.H.
Ibn Ḥajar ʿAsqalānī (Aḥmad ibn ʿAlī) v 773 A.H. 852 A.H.
Ibn ʿAdī (ʿAbdullāh ibn ʿAdī) v 277 A.H. 365 A.H.
Ibn ʿAbdul Barr Mālikī Yūsuf Abū ʿUmar v 368 A.H. 463 A.H.
Ibn Taymiyyah (Aḥmad ibn ʿAbdus Salām) v 661 A.H. 728 A.H.
Ibn Daqīqul ʿĪd (Muḥammad ibn ʿAlī) v 625 A.H. 702 A.H.
Ibn Rajab Ḥanbalī (Zayn ud Dīn ʿAbdur Raḥmān ibn 736 A.H. 795 A.H
Aḥmad) v
Ibn Mulaqqan ʿUmar ibn ʿAlī v 723 A.H. 804 A.H.
Ibn Rushayd Muḥammad ibn ʿUmar v 657 A.H. 721 A.H.
Ibn Jamāʿah Badrud Dīn Muḥammad ibn Ibrāhīm v 639 A.H. 733 A.H.
Ibn Sayyidun Nās Al-Yaʿmarī v 671 A.H. 734 A.H.
Ibn Kathīr ʿImādud Dīn Ismāʿīl ibn ʿUmar v 701 A.H. 774 A.H.
Ibnul ʿArabī Mālikī Muḥammad ibn ʿAbdullāh v 478 A.H. 543 A.H.
Ibnul Jawzī v 508 A.H. 597 A.H.
431
Ibn Qaṭṭān Fāsī ʿAlī ibn Muḥammad v 562 A.H 628 A.H.
Ibn Qayyim Al-Jawzī v 691 A.H. 751 A.H.
Ibnil Athīr Naṣrullāh Muḥammad Jazrī 558 A.H. 637 A.H.
Ibnil Athīr Jazrī Muḥammad ibn Muḥammad v (Also 544 A.H. 606 A.H.
known as Mubārak)
Ibnil Athīr Jazarī ʿIzzud Dīn ʿAlī ibn Muḥammad v 555 A.H. 630 A.H.
Ibn Nuqṭah Muḥammad ibn ʿAbdul Ghanī v 579 A.H. 629 A.H.
Ibn Ṣalāḥ Abū ʿUmar & ʿUthmān v 577 A.H. 643 A.H.
Ibn Kamāl Pāshā v 873 A.H. 940 A.H.
Ibn ʿIrāq Kinānī v 907 A.H. 963 A.H.
Ibn Mundah Muḥammad ibn ʿIsḥāq v 310 A.H. 395 A.H.
Ibn Mawwāq v ------ 642 A.H.
Ibn Humām Kamālud Dīn Muḥammad ibn ʿAbdul 790 A.H. 861 A.H.
Wāḥid v
Abūl Ḥasan Ashʿarī ʿAlī ibn Ismāʿīl v 260 A.H. 324 A.H.
Abū Mansūr Māturīdī Muḥammad ibn Muḥammad ------ 333 A.H.

v
Abū Ṭahir Silfī Aḥmad ibn Muḥammad v 476 A.H. 576 A.H.
Abū ʿUbaydah Maʿmar ibn Muthannā v (Majāzul 110 A.H. 209 A.H.
Qurʾān)
432
Abū ʿUbayd Qāsim ibn Sallām v (Kitābul Amwāl) 157 A.H. 224 A.H.
Mawlānā Abūl Kalām Āzād v 1300 A.H. 1377 A.H.
Abū Nuʿīm Aṣfahānī Aḥmad ibn ʿAbdullāh v 334 A.H. 430 A.H.
Bulqīnī ʿUmar ibn Raslān v 724 A.H. 805 A.H.
Bayhaqī Aḥmad ibn Ḥusayn Abū Bakr v 384 A.H. 458 A.H.
Patnī Muḥammad Ṭāhir v 914 A.H. 986 A.H.
(Qāḍī) Thanāʾullāh Pānī Pattī v 1143 A.H. 1225 A.H.
Jazāʾirī Ṭāhir ibn Ṣāliḥ v 1268 A.H. 1338 A.H.
Ḥāzmī Muḥammad ibn Mūsā v 548 A.H. 584 A.H.
Ḥākim Ibn Bayyiʿ (Muḥammad ibn ʿAbdullāh) 321 A.H. 405 A.H.
Nayshāpūrī v
Khaṭṭābī Aḥmad ibn Muḥammad Bustī v 319 A.H. 388 A.H.
Khaṭīb Baghdādī Abū Bakr Muḥammad ibn ʿAlī v 392 A.H. 463 A.H.
Khaṭīb Tabrīzī Walīuddīn v (Miskhātul Maṣābīḥ) After

737A.H.
Dārquṭnī ʿAlī ibn ʿUmar Baghdādī v 306 A.H. 385 A.H.
Damantī ʿAlī ibn Sulaymān Mālikī v 1298 A.H.
Dhahabī Shamsuddīn Muḥammad ibn Aḥmad v 673 A.H. 748 A.H.
Zarkashī Badrud Dīn v 745 A.H. 794 A.H.
433
Zaylaʿī Fakhrud Dīn ʿUthmān ibn ʿAlī Abū ------ 743 A.H.
Muḥammad v (Tabyīnul Ḥaqāʾiq Sharḥ Kanzud
Daqāʾiq)
Zaylaʿī Jamālud Dīn ʿAbdullāh ibn Yūsuf v (Naṣbur ------ 762 A.H.
Rāyah)
Subkī Taqīud Dīn v 683 A.H. 756 A.H.
Subkī Tājud Dīn v Ṣāḥibuṭ Ṭabqāt 727 A.H. 771 A.H.
Sakhāwī Muḥammad ibn ʿAbdur Raḥmān v 831 A.H. 902 A.H.
Sarakhsī Abū Bakr Muḥammad ibn Aḥmad v ------ 490 A.H.
As-Samʿānī Abū Saʿad ʿAbdul Karīm ibn Muḥammad v 506 A.H. 562 A.H.
Sindī Abūṭ Ṭayyīb Muḥammad v ------ 1109 A.H.
Sindī Muḥammad ibn ʿAbdul Hādī v1 ------ 1139 A.H.
Suyūṭī Jalālud Dīn ʿAbdur Raḥmān v (Jalālayn Part 1) 849 A.H. 911 A.H.
Shāmī Muḥammad ibn ʿĀbidīn v 1198 A.H. 1252 A.H.
Shawkānī (Muḥammad ibn ʿAlī) v 1173 A.H. 1250 A.H.
Ṭabrī ibn Jarīr v 224 A.H. 310 A.H.
ʿAbdul Wahhāb ibn Aḥmad Shaʿrānī v 899 A.H. 973 A.H.
Ajlūnī v 1087 A.H. 1163 A.H.
ʿIrāqī Zaynud Dīn ʿAbdur Raḥīm v 725 A.H. 806 A.H.
ʿŪqaylī Abū Jaʿfar Muḥammad ibn ʿAmr Makkī v ------ 322 A.H.
434
ʿAbdullāh ibn Mubārak v 118 A.H. 181 A.H.
ʿUmar ibn ʿAbdul ʿAzīz v 61 A.H. 101 A.H.
ʿAlī Murghīnānī, Author of Hidāyah v 511 A.H. 593 A.H.
ʿAynī Badrud Dīn Maḥmūd v 762 A.H. 855 A.H.
Ghazālī Muḥammad ibn Muḥammad v 450 A.H. 505 A.H.
Mawlānā Faḍlur Raḥmān Ghanj Murādabādī v 1208 A.H. 1313 A.H.
Qāḍī ʿIyāḍ ibn Mūsā v 476 A.H. 544 A.H.
Qurashī ʿAbdul Qādir v 696 A.H. 775 A.H.
Kāsānī ʿAlāʾud Dīn, author of Badāʿī Ṣanāʾi v ------ 587 A.H.
Kawtharī Muḥammad Zāhid v 1296 A.H. 1371 A.H.
Mubārakpūrī ʿAbdur Raḥmān v 1283 A.H. 1353 A.H.
Mujaddid Alf-Thānī Shaykh Aḥmad Sarhindī v 972 A.H. 1035 A.H.
Maḥallī Jalālud Dīn Muḥammad ibn Aḥmad v 791 A.H. 864 A.H.
The Teacher of Suyūṭī (Jalalayn Part 2)
Khājah Muʿīnud Dīn Chishtī v 537 A.H. 633 A.H.
Muḥammad ibn Saʿīd Sunbul Makkī v (Risālatul ------ 1175 A.H.

Awāʾīl)
Muḥammad ibn Qāsim v, conqueror of India ------ 96 A.H.
Maḥmūd Ghaznawī Sulṭān v 360 A.H. 421 A.H.
435
Mīzzī Jamālud Dīn Yūsuf v 645 A.H. 724 A.H.
Mughlaṭāʾī ibn Qalīj v 689 A.H. 762 A.H.
Maqdisī Muḥammad ibn Ṭāhir v 448 A.H. 507 A.H.
Mullā ʿAlī Qārī ʿAlī ibn Sulṭān v 930 A.H. 1014 A.H.
Mullā Kātib Chalpī Ḥājī Khalīfah v 1018 A.H. 1067 A.H.
Muwaffiq ibn Qudāmah ʿAbdullāh Ibn Aḥmad v 541 A.H. 620 A.H.
Ḥazrat Niẓāmud Dīn Awliyāʾ v 636 A.H. 725 A.H.
Mullā Niẓāmud Dīn ibn Quṭbud Dīn Sihālwī v ------ 1161 A.H.
(Dars-e-Niẓamī)
Haythamī Nūrud Dīn ʿAlī v 735 A.H. 807 A.H.
Nawawī Muḥiyyud Dīn Yaḥyā ibn Sharf v 631 A.H. 676 A.H.
Wāqidī Muḥammad ibn ʿUmar v 130 A.H. 207 A.H.
Yaḥyā ibn Maʿīn v 158 A.H. 233 A.H.
436
437
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS SOME FAMOUS ʿULAMĀʾ OF DEOBAND
Birth and Death Years of the Famous ʿUlamāʾ of Deoband
NAME BIRTH DEATH
ʿAllāmah Ibrāhīm Balyāwī v 1304 A.H. 1387 A.H.
Mawlānā Aḥmad ʿAlī Sahāranpūrī v Muḥashhī of 1225 A.H. 1297 A.H.

Bukhārī
Mawlānā Muḥammad Aḥmad Nānotwī Deobandī v, 1279 A.H. 1347 A.H.

Principal of Dārul ʿUlūm Deoband
Mawlānā Idrīs Kāndhalwī v 1318 A.H. 1394 A.H.
Mawlānā Ashraf ʿAlī Thānwī v 1280 A.H. 1362 A.H.
Mawlānā Aṣghar Ḥusayn Deobandī v 1292 A.H. 1364 A.H.
Mawlānā Aʿzāz ʿAlī Deobandī v 1299 A.H. 1374 A.H.
Ḥajī Imdādullāh Thānwī Muhājir Madnī v 1233 A.H. 1317 A.H.
Mawlānā Inʿāmul Ḥasan Kāndhalwī v 1336 A.H. 1415 A.H.
ʿAllamāh Anwar Shāh Kashmīrī v 1292 A.H. 1352 A.H.
Mawlānā Badr-e-ʿĀlam Mīrthī v 1316 A.H. 1385 A.H.
Mawlānā Ḥabībur Raḥmān Aʿẓmī v 1319 A.H. 1412 A.H.
Mawlānā Ḥusayn Aḥmad Madnī v 1296 A.H. 1377 A.H.
Mawlānā Khalīl Aḥmad Sahāranpūrī v 1269 A.H. 1346 A.H.
Mawlānā Rashīd Ḥasan Deobandī v Author of ------ 1969 C.E.

Kitābul Īmān
438
Muftī Zaynul ʿĀbidīn Fayṣal Ābādī v ------ 1425 A.H.
Mawlānā Saʿīd Aḥmad Khān Ṣāḥib v 1903 C.E. 1419 A.H.
Mawlānā Rashīd Aḥmad Gangohī v 1244 A.H. 1323 A.H.
ʿAllāmah Shabbīr Aḥmad ʿUthmānī v 1305 A.H. 1369 A.H.
Mawlānā Ẓafar Aḥmad ʿUthmānī v 1308 A.H. 1394 A.H.
Mawlānā ʿAbdur Raḥmān Kāmilpuri v 1882 C.E. 1385 A.H
Shāh ʿAbdul ʿAzīz Muḥaddith Dehlawī v 1159 A.H. 1239 A.H.
Shāh ʿAbdul Ghanī Mujadidī Dehlawī v 1235 A.H. 1296 A.H.
Mawlānā ʿAbdul Qādir Rāʾypūrī v ? 1382 A.H.
Mawlānā ʿAbdul Laṭīf Nʿumānī Aʿẓmī v approx. 1320 1392 A.H.

A.H.
Muftī ʿAzīzur Raḥmān ʿUthmānī v 1275 A.H. 1347 A.H.
Mawlānā ʿAṭāʾullāh Shāh Bukhārī v 1310 A.H. 1381 A.H.
Mawlānā Fakhrud Dīn Aḥmad Murādabādī v 1307 A.H. 1392 A.H.
Muftī Kifāyatullāh Dehlawī (Shāhjahānpūrī) v 1292 A.H. 1372 A.H.
Shāh Muḥammad Isḥāq Dehlawī Madnī v 1197 A.H. 1262 A.H.
Mawlānā Muḥammad Ilyās Kāndhalwī v 1303 A.H. 1363 A.H.
Muftī Muḥammad Shafīʿ ʿUthmānī v 1314 A.H. 1396 A.H.
Mawlānā Muḥammad Qāsim Nānotawī v 1238 A.H. 1297 A.H.
439
Mullā Maḥmūd Deobandī Muʿalim Awwal v ------ 1304 A.H.
Mawlānā Maḥmūd Ḥasan Deobandī Shaykhul Hind v 1268 A.H. 1339 A.H.
Muftī Maḥmūd Ḥasan Ghangohī v 1325 A.H. 1417 A.H.
Qārī Muḥammad Ṭayyib Ṣāḥib v 1315 A.H. 1403 A.H.
Mawlānā Shaykh Muḥammad Zakariyyā Kāndhalwī v 1315 A.H. 1402 A.H.
Mawlānā Muḥammad ʿUmar Pālanpūrī v 1348 A.H. 1418 A.H.
Mawlānā Muḥammad Miyā v 1321 A.H. 1395 A.H.
Mawlānā Muḥammad Yaḥyā Kāndhalwī (Father of 1287 A.H. 1334 A.H.

Shaykh Zakariyyā) v
Mawlānā Maḥammad Yaʿqūb Nānotawī v 1249 A.H. 1302 A.H.
Mawlānā Muḥammad Yūsuf Binorī v 1326 A.H. 1397 A.H.
Mawlānā Muḥammad Yūsuf Kāndhalwī v 1335 A.H. 1384 A.H.
Mawlānā Masīhullāh Khān Jalāl Ābādī v 1330 A.H. 1413 A.H.
Mawlānā Manāẓir Aḥsan Gaylānī v 1310 A.H. 1375 A.H.
Mawlānā Muḥammad Manẓūr Nūʿmānī v 1323 A.H. 1417 A.H.
Muftī Mahdī Ḥasan Shāhjahānpūrī v 1300 A.H. 1396 A.H.
Muftī Niẓāmuddīn ʾAʿẓmī v 1328 A.H. 1420 A.H.
Mawlānā Shāh Waṣiyullāh Fataḥpūrī ʾAʿzmī v 1310 A.H. 1387 A.H.
440
Shāh Walīullāh Muḥaddith Dehlawī v 1114 A.H. 1176 A.H.
Mawlānā Yaʿqūb Nanotwī v 1249 A.H. 1302 A.H.
441
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS SOURCES & REFERENCES
Sources and References
1 Ibn Mājah aur ʿIlm Ḥadīth- Mawlānā Muḥammad ʿAbdur Rashīd Nuʿmānī v
Publisher: Mīr Muḥammad Kutub Khānah, Karāchī
2 Ikhtiṣār ʿUlūm-ul-Ḥadīth- Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Kathīr with his Sharḥ, Al-Bāḥithul Ḥathīth by
Aḥmad Muḥammad Shākir Al-Miṣrī v
3 Irshād-us-Sārī Sharḥ Bukhārī – Abul ʿAbbās Aḥmad Qasṭalānī v (death: 923 A.H.)
4 Aqwamul Masālik fī Baḥthi Riwāyat Mālik ʿAn Abī Ḥanīfah wa Riwāyatu Abī
Ḥanīfah ʿan Mālik- ʿAllāmah Muḥammad Zāhid Kawtharī v
5 Al-Intiṣār wat Tarjīḥ by Sibṭ Ibn Jawzī v
6 Bulūghul Amānī fī Sirati Imām Muḥammad ibn Ḥasan Ash-Shaybānī- Kawtharī v

1371 A.H.
7 Tārīkh Baghdād- Khaṭīb Baghdādī v
8 Tabyīḍuṣ Ṣaḥifah- Imām Suyūtī v (death: 911 A.H.) Publisher: Mīr Muḥammad,
Karāchī
9 Tadrībur Rāwī fī Sharḥ Taqrībun Nawawī- Imām Suyūṭī v (death: 911 A.H.)
Publisher: Mīr Muḥammad Karāchī
10 Tadhkiratul Ḥuffāẓ- Ḥāfiẓ Dhahabī v (death: 748 A.H.)
11 Tarjumān-us-Sunnah- Mawlānā Badre ʿĀlam Mīrtī Muhājir Madnī v Publisher:

Nadwatul Muṣannifīn, Delhi
12 Taqrīr Bukhārī - ʿAllamāh Shabbīr Aḥmad ʿUthmānī v. Published by Jamiʿah

Islāmiyyah Dabhel, Gujarat India
13 Tawjīhun Naẓr ilā Usūl-ul-Athar by Ṭāhir ibn Ṣāliḥ ibn Aḥmad Al-Jazāʾirī
442
Damashkī v (death: 1338 A.H.) Beirut
14 Tahdhībut Tahdhīb-Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar ʿAsqalānī v (death: 852 A.H.)
15 Jamiʿ Bayānul ʿIlm wa Faḍlihī-Ibn ʿAbdul Bar Mālikī v (death: 463 A.H.) 1398 A.H.
16 Jamiʿ-ud-Darārī Sharḥ Bukhārī, Taqrīr Bukhārī - Mawlānā ʿAbdul Jabbār Aʿẓmī t

Publisher: Maktabah Ḥaram Murādabad, India.
17 Al-Jawāhirul Muḍīyyah fī Ṭabaqātil Ḥanafīyyah- Shaykh ʿAbdul Qādir Qurashī v

(death: 775 A.H.) Publisher: Dārul Kitāb Al-ʿArbī, Beirut
18 Ar-Rafʿu wat Takmīl Fīl Jarḥ wat Taʿdīl- Imām ʿAbdul Ḥay Lucknawī Hindī v
(death: 1304 A.H.) Publisher: Thālithahu Ḥalb, Beirut
19 Zahrur Rabī, Ḥāshiyah of Mujtabā by Nasāʾī – Suyūṭī v
20 Shurūṭul Aʾimmah Khamsah- Ḥāfiẓ Muḥammad ibn Mūsā Ḥāzmī v (death: 584
A.H.) Published with Ibn Mājah in Karāchī
21 Shurūṭul Aʾimmah Sittah- Ḥāfiẓ Muḥammad ibn Ṭāhir Maqdisī v (death: 507
A.H.) with Taʿlīq of Kawtharī, Karāchī.
22 Ẓafarul Muḥaṣṣilīn bi Aḥwālil Muṣannifīn- Mawlānā Muḥammad Ḥānīf Gangohī

v with Qurratul ʿUyūn fī Tadhkiratil funūn.
23 ʿUjālatun Nāfiʿah- Ḥazrat Shāh ʿAbdul ʿAzīz Muḥaddith Dehlawī v (death: 1239
A.H.)
24 Fatḥul Mughīth Sharḥ Alfiyyatul Ḥadīth by ʿIrāqī- Shaykh Shamsud Dīn Sakhāwī v
(death: 902 A.H.) Publisher: Maktabtus Salafiyyah, Madīnah Munawwarah
25 Al-Fawāʾidul Bahiyyah fī Tarājimil Ḥanafiyyah- Imām ʿAbdul Ḥay Lukhnawī Hindī

v (death: 1304 A.H.)
26 Fawāʾid Jāmiʿah on ʿUjālah Nāfiʿah- Mawlānā ʿAbdul Halīm Chashtī v
443
27 Faḍlul Bārī Taqrīr e Bukhārī - Mawlānā Shabbīr Aḥmad ʿUthmānī v (death: 1369
A.H.) with additions by Qāḍī ʿAbdur Raḥmān v
28 Fayḍul Bārī Taqrīr e Bukhārī of ʿAllāmah Anwar Shāh Kashmīrī t compiled by

Mawlānā Badre Ālam Mīrtī v
29 Mā Tamassu Ilayhil Ḥājah liman yuṭāliʿu Sunan Ibn Mājah- Mawlānā Muḥammad
ʿAbdur Rashīd Nuʿmānī v Publisher: Mīr Muḥammad, Karāchī
30 Muqaddamah Awjazul Masālik of Muʾwaṭtā Imām Mālik- Shaykhul Ḥadīth

Mawlānā Muḥammad Zakariyyā Kandhelwī v (death: 1402 A.H.)
31 Muqaddamah Anwārul Bārī, Sharḥ Bukhārī - Mawlānā Sayyid Aḥmad Raḍā

Aḥmad Bijnūrī v
32 Muqaddamah Irshādus Sārī- Abū ʿAbbās Aḥmad Qasṭalānī v (death: 923 A.H. in
Egypt)
33 Muqaddamah Fatḥul Mulhim, Sharḥ of Saḥīḥ Muslim- ʿAllāmah Shabbīr Aḥmad

ʿUthmānī v (death: 1369 A.H., 1949 C.E.)
34 Muqaddamah Nawawī, Sharḥ Bukhārī (death: 676 A.H.) (Mā tamassu ilayhil
Ḥājatul Qārī Saḥīḥ Imām Bukhārī with taḥqīq by Ḥasan ʿAlī ʿAbdul Hamīd v),
Beirut
35 Muqaddamah Lāmiʿ Darārī- Shaykh Muḥammad Zakariyyā Kandhelwī v (death:

1402 A.H.) Published: 1379 A.H. Publisher: Maktabah Yaḥyawiyah, Sahāranpūr
(hand-written) The other nuskha (copy) of Lāmiʿ published is type-written.
Many pages of this copy which have been mentioned are more than the pages
taken from the hand-written copy.
36 Hadyus Sārī Muqaddamah Fatḥul Bārī- Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar ʿAsqalānī v (death: 852
A.H.). It has been published with Ibn Bāz’s Ḥāshiyah by Quṣay Muḥibbud Dīn Al-
Khāṭīb and Maktabah Yūsufī, Deoband, India.
37 Muqaddamah Iʿlā us Sunan (Qawāʿid fī ʿUlūm e Ḥadīth)- Mawlānā Ẓafar Aḥmad

ʿUthmānī v (death:1394 A.H.) with the Taʿlīq of Shaykh ʿAbdul Fattāḥ Abū
444
Ghuddah v. Publisher: Idāratul Qurʾān, Karāchī.
‫وصلى هللا على خير خلقه محمد وعلى ٰا ٰٰله وصحبه اجمعين‬
.‫وآخر دعوانا ان الحمد ہلل رب العالمين‬
445
A GIFT OF PRECIOUS GEMS A BRIEF BIOGRAPHY OF THE COMPILER
A Brief Biography of The Compiler
(May Allāh l extend his shadow)
Birth and Studies
Ḥazrat ‫ حفظه هللا‬was born on 14 Ṣafar, 1366 A.H. (7 January,1947 C.E.) in

Mawnath Bhanjan, U.P. He began and completed his studies in Mau.
After graduating from Miftaḥul ʿUlūm in 1386, he studied extra books
in various fields. He studied the books of fatāwā under the supervision
of Muḥaddith Kabīr ʿAllāmah Ḥabībur Raḥmān Aʿẓmī v and he
practised writing and issuing fatāwā. He studied the Qirāʾah Sabʿah
ʿAsharah (seven and ten modes of Qurʾān recitation) in Dārul ʿUlūm
Mau. Some of his teachers are: Muḥaddith Aʿẓmī, Mawlānā ʿAbdul Laṭīf
Nuʿmānī, Ḥazrat Mawlānā ʿAbdul Jabbār Aʿẓmī and his respected
father, Qārī Ḥafīẓur Raḥmān ‫رحمهم هللا‬. His teacher, Ḥazrat Mawlānā ʿAbdur
Rashīd Ḥusaynī v gifted him his personal copy of his book, “Tuḥfatul
Aḥwadhī”.
Service
After three or four years, he went to Maẓharul ʿUlūm, Banaras and

taught Jāmiʿ Tirmidhī, Mishkāt and other books. He also issued fatāwā.
After four years, in 1394 A.H., he went to Jāmiʿah Islāmiyyah Dabhel.
Here, he also taught Ṭaḥāwī, Sunan Nasāʾī, Sunan Ibn Mājah, Muwattāʾ
Imām Mālik, Mishkāt, Jalālayn, Hidāyah, Mutanabbī, Himāsah, Sharḥ
Jāmīʿ, Ibn Aqīl among other books. He also taught Sabʿah ʿAsharah
(Qirāʿah). He wrote an introduction regarding the knowledge of qirāʾah
and biographies of the qurāʾ. He also wrote a history on Jāmiʾah which
was published in India and Pakistan.
In 1406 A.H., he went to Azaadville, South Africa. Here, he also taught

Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī, Jāmiʿ Tirmidhī, Mishkāt, Al-Ashbāh wan Naẓāʾir among
other books. Apart from this, he also taught Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim, Sunan Abū
Dāwūd, Sunan Ibn Mājah, Muqaddamah Ibn Ṣalāḥ and the Musalsalāt
etc.
Other Services
446
Dārul ʿUlūm Nuʿmāniyyah, Chatsworth-Durban KwaZulu-Natal which

was established in 2001 began with five students. Under his
leadership, it has advanced to the extent that currently, there are one
hundred and twenty (120) students. There is a full time Ḥifẓ class and
also a part time class for those who go to school. Arabic is also taught
until the Ṣiḥāḥ Sittah. Qirāʿah is also taught and the students are also
involved in daʿwah. Other organizations also operate under this
institution in many other places. Madrasah Raḥmāniyyah, Laudium
also offers many services under his leadership. In 2002, he also
established Madrasa Daʿwatul Ḥaq in Azaadville in which there are
currently one hundred and sixty (160) students studying both
academic and secular knowledge. Many of the students are orphans.
There are also such students whose parents are or one of them is non-
Muslim. The madrasah maintains their living, learning and food costs.
Currently, on the outskirts of Azaadville, a new land has been obtained
and a structure is also ready. He is also the head of and assists many
organizations other than the afore mentioned. He also has a deep
connection with daʿwah and tablīgh. He also travels to various
countries.
He is also connected to taṣawwuf and the khānqah. He first took bayʿah

(pledge of allegiance) on the hands of Ḥazrat Mawlānā Zakariyyā ṣāḥib
v. Then, by his command, he connected to Ḥazrat Muftī Maḥmūd Ḥasan
ṣāḥib v. He then built a connection with Ḥazrat Mawlānā Ḥakīm
Muḥammad Akhtar Ṣāḥib v and received the honour of khilāfah. Thus,
his iṣlāḥī silsilah (path to rectification) continued.
Books
He has approximately fifty published books and articles. Some of them

are:
1. Tārīkh Jāmiʿah Dabhel, Gujarat India

2. Muqaddamah Bukhārī
3. Muqaddamah Tirmidhī
4. Muqaddamah Ṭaḥāwī
5. Qawmah Jalsah mein Iṭminān kā Wujūb aur un mayn Adhkār kā
Thubūt
447
6. Shab-e-Barāʾah Kī Ḥaqīqat
7. ʿAmāmah Topī Kurtā
8. Ṣaḥīḥ aur Munasib Tar Musāfate Qaṣr
9. Sawānikh Imām Abū Ḥanīfah
10. Sawānikh Imām Abū Yūsuf
11. Sawānikh Imām Muḥammad
12. Maqālāt ʾAʿzmī- (In Arabic)
13. Maqālāt ʾAʿzmī - (In Urdu)
14. Muqaddamah ʿIlmul Qirāʾah
15. Tadhkirah ʾAimmah ʿAsharah aur Unke Ruwāt
Many books regarding daʿwah and tablīgh have also been published.
The Impressions (Ta-athhurāt) and Statements of the ʿUlamāʾ
When he went in the presence of ʿĀrif billāh, Ḥazrat Mawlānā

Muḥammad Ahmad Partabghdhi v, Mawlānā was lying down. He went
and sat by his feet out of respect. Mawlānā immediately folded his feet
in and gifted him a new 10 Rupee note when he was leaving.
His Shaykh, Ḥazrat Shāh Ḥakīm Muḥammad Akhtar ṣāḥib (May Allāh
enlighten and fill his grave with light) mentioned regarding him: “Your
beloved letter has delighted the heart and has caused the soul to
experience a state of ecstasy. Congratulations are due for your loving
enthusiasm…” At the time of taking bayʿah (the pledge of allegiance)
from him, he (Ḥazrat Shāh Ḥakīm Muḥammad Akhtar ṣāḥib) said: “We
have received biryani which has been prepared already today.”
The khalīfah of Ḥazrat Muftī Maḥmūd Ḥasan Gangohī v, Ḥazrat Muftī

Muḥammad Fārūq Mirthī v said: “Amongst the teachers, worthy of a
special mention is Ḥazrat Mawlānā Fazlur Rahman ṣāḥib Azmi who
teaches Bukharī Sharīf and was a teacher in Jāmiʿah Islāmiyyah
Tālimuddīn Dabhel. It is befitting to call him a mountain of knowledge.”
(Afrīqah aur Khidmate Faqīhul Ummah 1/161)
After the famous muballigh, Mawlānā Farūqī Makkī ṣāḥib v

participated in his dars (class), he expressed his impression of Ḥazrat
in the following words: “Such informative and interesting classes were
conducted by Mawlānā Binnorī. A dars like that is difficult to find in
448
these times. Your being is a great blessing for the people of South
Africa. If you were not here, perhaps there would not have been such
an atmosphere of Dīn and knowledge. May Allāh l grant the people of
South Africa the ability to appreciate you.” (For details, see his biography
which is available in both Urdu and English.)
A Glad-Tiding
Shaykh Zuhayr Nāṣirun Nāṣir Ḥalabī Ḥanafī (resident of Madīnah)

studied and obtained ijāzah (authorisation) for the Ḥadīth of Risālatul
Awāʾil for himself, his daughter and son-in-law. He then said to his
students: “The likes of this Shaykh is very rare.” He also said: “Hold fast
to him. Firstly, due to his ʾīmān, then due to his love for Nabī n, then,
due to his knowledge.” On one occasion, Shaykh and some other
companions, were in the dars of Ḥadīth conducted by him in Masjid
Nabawī on the side of the blessed feet of Nabī n. The Shaykh’s son
heard Nabī n saying in a dream: “The dars of Ḥadīth is being conducted
in my Masjid and you are sleeping?” On awakening, when he entered
Masjid Nabawī, he saw that Ḥazrat’s dars was taking place…..(ʿAtīq)
Alḥamdulillāh, only through Allāh’s infinite Mercy and Grace,

the first review of this translation was completed on Friday, 3rd
Rabīʿuth Thānī 1444 (28th October 2022) before Maghrib ṣalāh
in the blessed sanctuary of Masjid Nabawī, Madīnah
Munawwarah.
.‫والحمد ہلل وحده وصلَّى هللا علي من ال نب َّي بعده‬
َّ ‫ربَّنا تقبَّل منَّا إنَّك أنت ال‬

‫سميع العليم‬
َّ ‫وتب علينآ إنَّك أنت الت َّ َّواب‬

.‫الرحيم‬
449

A Gift of Precious Gems Bukhari Intro SH Fadhlur Rahman Final 20 FEB 2024

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

A Gift of Precious Gems Bukhari Intro SH Fadhlur Rahman Final 20 FEB 2024

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

A Gift of Precious Gems Bukhari Intro SH Fadhlur Rahman Final 20 FEB 2024

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

A Gift of Precious Gems

For The Students of Imām Bukhārī’s Ṣaḥīḥ

Darul Iman Institute Barbados

Darul Iman (Daʿwatul Haq)

Idarah Ihyaa us Sunnah

‫ت‬ t ‫غ‬ gh (like French r, with full

‫ج‬ j ‫ق‬ q (a guttural q, with full

‫ح‬ ḥ (tensely breathed h) ‫ك‬ k

‫خ‬ kh (ch in Scottish loch, ‫ل‬ l

‫ذ‬ dh (the soft th in the) ‫و‬ w

‫ض‬ ḍ (heavy d, with full ‫ضمة‬ u

A Warm Welcome to the Guests of Nabī n

ِ‫ى ٭ غُ ِ ِّر ْال ُو ُج ْو ِه َوزَ ي ِْن كُ ِِّل َمالَء‬

ِ‫س ِك ْينَ ٍة َو َحيَاء‬ ِ ‫ب ْال َح ِد ْي‬

Awe-inspiring, honourable and intelligent; for them are virtues innumerable.

ِ‫ش َهدَاء‬ َ ‫ي بِ ِه أ َ ْق َال ُم ُه ْم ٭ أ َ ْزكى َوأ َ ْف‬

O seekers of the knowledge of the Prophet Muḥammad (n), others cannot be

Abū Bakr Ibn Durayd Al-ʾAzdī

Ḥazrat Mawlānā Fazlur Rahman Ṣāḥib Azmi 1 ‫دامتٰ بركاتهم‬

Fazlur Rahman Azmi

Alḥamdulillāh, under the tawwajjuh of Ḥazrat Mawlānā Fazlur Rahman

34 Mention of ʿAbdullāh ibn Mubārak v 83

36 Our Opinion Regarding Imām Bukhārī’s v School of Thought 89

59 The Thulāthiyyāt of Ibn Mājah, Tirmidhī and Abū Dāwūd 144

72 Details of Imām Bukhārī’s v Conditions 171

119 Muḥaddith Kabīr ʿAllāmah Mawlānā Ḥabīb-ur-Raḥmān Ṣāḥib Aʿẓmī v 374

All of my noble teachers

Muḥaddith Kabīr Mawlānā Ḥabīb-ur-Raḥmān Aʿẓmī Amīr-ul-Hind

Shaykh-ul-Ḥadīth Ḥazrat Mawlānā ʿAbdul Laṭīf Nuʿmānī Aʿẓmī

My Honourable father, Shaykh-ul-Ḥadīth Ḥazrat Muftī Qārī Ḥafīẓ -ur-

‫نور هللا مرقدهم‬

May Allāh l enlighten their graves with light.

Blessed Words and Marginalia

The Researcher and Muḥaddith of The Time

Ḥazrat Mawlānā Muḥammad ʿAbdur Rashīd Nuʿmānī, Karāchī 1 v

Saturday 13 Ṣafar, 1412 A.H.

Respected Mawlānā Fazlur Rahman Azmi ṣāḥib

.‫وفقني هللا واياكم لما يحب ويرضي‬

.‫ الحمد هلل علي العافية‬.‫وعليكم السالم ورحمة هللا وبركاته‬

Your respected letter dated 21 Muḥarram, 1412 A.H. has been

Whatever has been mentioned until now regarding the discussions of

this from many different scholars. Varying opinions can be found

Whatever I have written, I have written it in the margins of the

2 The entire letter is very beneficial. It is mentioned in the biography of

Ḥazrat Mawlānā ʿAbdul Ḥaq Ṣāḥib Aʿẓmī v 1

Shaykh-ul-Ḥadīth of Dārul ʿUlūm Deoband, India

.‫ أما بعد‬،‫نحمده ونصلّى على رسوله الكريم‬

“Hadiyyatud Darārī for the students of the Ṣaḥīḥ of Imām Bukhārī” is a

This praiseworthy scholar has written a thorough discussion on the

The aforementioned Mawlānā has also authored many other books,

‫ض َّم الَيها أ ْلف آمينا‬

Lowly and humble servant,

Ḥazrat Mawlānā Niʿmatullāh Ṣāḥib ‫دا مت بركاتهم‬

Teacher of Ḥadīth and Head of Takhaṣṣuṣ fil Ḥadīth Department

in Dārul ʿUlūm Deoband (Birth:1366 A.H.)

It is a common custom in the religious schools of India, Pakistan and

The early scholars did such productive research regarding every

Now, it will be a great achievement for those coming afterwards,

Mawlānā’s firmness in knowledge and sincerity in ʿamal (practice) is