"No Need for Saheeh al-Bukhari!"

[Omar del Sur]

Don't be fooled by the title! I recommend watching

(don't worry, he is not attacking Saheeh Bukhari)

 

[Awbarre]

Sahih Bukhari, just like any other book in hadith literature, has traditions which are authentically attributable and reliable, traditions which are dubious and traditions which are grossly inauthentic.

The way some Muslims worship Bukhari as if though he is infallible and his contributions surpass immunity to error is just pseudo idolatry. Might aswell just make a statue of Bukhari in your mosque and bow to him.

 

[Omar del Sur]

Sahih Bukhari, just like any other book in hadith literature, has traditions which are authentically attributable and reliable, traditions which are dubious and traditions which are grossly inauthentic.

The way some Muslims worship Bukhari as if though he is infallible and his contributions surpass immunity to error is just pseudo idolatry. Might aswell just make a statue of Bukhari in your mosque and bow to him.

"The scholars are unanimously agreed that as-Saheehayn (i.e., Saheeh al-Bukhari and Saheeh Muslim) are the soundest two books after the Book of Allah, may He be exalted, and they are held in the highest esteem by the Muslims, elite and common folk, scholars and ignorant, as is well known...
These two books are the main references and solid foundations on which the scholars rely to work out the rulings of sharee‘ah, so it is not permissible to cast aspersions on them or say things to sow doubts about them in such a way as to undermine their veracity in people’s minds, whether they are scholars or otherwise.

Rather those who may discuss such matters are senior scholars and specialists in hadith; no one else has the right to indulge in such matters which may undermine the foundations, sow doubts about the fundamentals and stir up confusion."

Are there any da‘eef (weak) hadiths in al-Bukhaari and Muslim? - Islam Question & Answer

islamqa.info

Thinking a book is accurate is not a form of worship. The consensis of the scholars has more weight than a random anonymous person on the internet.

 

[Awbarre]

"The scholars are unanimously agreed that as-Saheehayn (i.e., Saheeh al-Bukhari and Saheeh Muslim) are the soundest two books after the Book of Allah, may He be exalted, and they are held in the highest esteem by the Muslims, elite and common folk, scholars and ignorant, as is well known...
These two books are the main references and solid foundations on which the scholars rely to work out the rulings of sharee‘ah, so it is not permissible to cast aspersions on them or say things to sow doubts about them in such a way as to undermine their veracity in people’s minds, whether they are scholars or otherwise.

Rather those who may discuss such matters are senior scholars and specialists in hadith; no one else has the right to indulge in such matters which may undermine the foundations, sow doubts about the fundamentals and stir up confusion."

Are there any da‘eef (weak) hadiths in al-Bukhaari and Muslim? - Islam Question & Answer

islamqa.info

Thinking a book is accurate is not a form of worship. The consensis of the scholars has more weight than a random anonymous person on the internet.

Although considered to be the most authentic book in hadith literature, that doesn't negate the fact that not everything in Bukhari is authentic. Throughout Islamic history there has been many critiques against Bukhari. Al Daraqutni being the most well known. There are many weak and inauthentic hadith in Bukhari aswell.
Grading hadith is a matter of personal judgement at the discretion of the Hadith specialist.

 

[Omar del Sur]

Although considered to be the most authentic book in hadith literature, that doesn't negate the fact that not everything in Bukhari is authentic. Throughout Islamic history there has been many critiques against Bukhari. Al Daraqutni being the most well known. There are many weak and inauthentic hadith in Bukhari aswell.
Grading hadith is a matter of personal judgement at the discretion of the Hadith specialist.

"In Saheeh Muslim in particular, there are number of hadiths which some scholars said were weak or problematic, including Abu’l-Hasan ad-Daaraqtni, Abu ‘Ali an-Neesaaboori, Abu’l-Fadl ibn ‘Ammaar, Abu ‘Ali al-Ghassaani, Abu’l-Husayn al-‘Attaar, Abu Mas‘ood ad-Dimashaqi and Abu ‘Abdillah adh-Dhahabi.

In Saheeh al-Bukhaari there are also some such reports, but they are very few, and these few may, upon close examination, turn out to be sound."

Are there any da‘eef (weak) hadiths in al-Bukhaari and Muslim? - Islam Question & Answer

islamqa.info

 

[Awbarre]

"In Saheeh Muslim in particular, there are number of hadiths which some scholars said were weak or problematic, including Abu’l-Hasan ad-Daaraqtni, Abu ‘Ali an-Neesaaboori, Abu’l-Fadl ibn ‘Ammaar, Abu ‘Ali al-Ghassaani, Abu’l-Husayn al-‘Attaar, Abu Mas‘ood ad-Dimashaqi and Abu ‘Abdillah adh-Dhahabi.

In Saheeh al-Bukhaari there are also some such reports, but they are very few, and these few may, upon close examination, turn out to be sound."

Are there any da‘eef (weak) hadiths in al-Bukhaari and Muslim? - Islam Question & Answer

islamqa.info

I have a question for you.

Do you really believe that every single hadith in Bukhari is absolutely authentic?

 

[Omar del Sur]

I have a question for you.

Do you really believe that every single hadith in Bukhari is absolutely authentic?

I have a question for you.

Why do you want to push this anti-Bukhari stuff?

Just be happy that people are interested in Saheeh Bukhari and quit trying to undermine Saheeh Bukhari. I'm sure the anti-Muslim types would love your efforts here.