Are all the ahaadeeth in Saheeh al-Bukhaari saheeh (sound)?

Question

Praise be to Allah.

The Saheeh of Imam Abu ‘Abd-Allaah Muhammad ibn
Ismaa’eel al-Bukhaari is the soundest book of narration after the Book of
Allaah. The scholars, muhaddithoon (scholars of hadeeth) and hafizes all
bear witness to its high status in terms of authenticity and precision.
al-Haafiz Abu ‘Amr ibn al-Salaah said in Siyaanat Saheeh Muslim (p.
86), with his isnaad going back to Imam al-Haramayn al-Juwayni that he
said:

If any man were to swear that he would divorce his wife if it
were not the case that what is in the books of al-Bukhaari and Muslim is
what they ruled to be sound of the words of the Prophet (peace and
blessings of Allaah be upon him), then divorce would not be binding upon
him, and he would not be breaking his oath, because the Muslim scholars are
unanimously agreed that they are saheeh. End quote.

This is not far-fetched, because al-Bukhaari is the great
imam and hafiz to whose memory and precision all the muhaddithoon bore
witness. He used to ask Allaah for guidance (by praying istikhaarah) and
pray two rak’ahs concerning every hadeeth he included in his book, until he
completed it in this manner.

Even though we are aware that there are some minor criticisms
levelled at a few ahaadeeth that are recorded in Saheeh al-Bukhaari,
we are certain that there is nothing wrong with applying the label of saheeh
to all the ahaadeeth in the book, for the following reasons:

1.

Most of the scholars and muhaddithoon think that Imam
al-Bukhaari is in the right with regard to matters for which he was
criticized. It is well known that it is not correct methodology to accept
criticism just because it exists, rather it depends on evidence and proof.
Al-Haafiz Ibn Hajar (may Allaah have mercy on him), in his great book
Fath al-Baari and especially in his introduction which is called
Hadiy al-Saari, discussed the answer to these minor criticisms, and
explained what is correct.

2.

The number of ahaadeeth in Saheeh al-Bukhaari,
including repetitions – according to the numbering of Muhammad Fu’aad ‘Abd
al-Baaqi (may Allaah have mercy on him) – is 7563. When we realize that the
number of criticisms is less than twenty, and that most of these criticisms
have to do with matters concerning the isnaads, or whether the hadeeth
reaches the highest level of saheeh, or they have to do with one or two
words in a hadeeth, and that the criticisms which have to do with matters
affecting the soundness of the matn (text) are rare and affect no more than
one or two or three ahaadeeth – when we know all that, we realize that
applying the label of saheeh to everything that is in al-Bukhaari, texts and
isnaads, is correct and cannot be denied.

Imam al-Nawawi (may Allaah have mercy on him) said:

The ummah is unanimously agreed that these two books are
saheeh and it is obligatory to follow their ahaadeeth. End quote.

Tahdheeb al-Asma’ wa’l-Lughaat
(1/73).

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah said:

There is no book beneath the canopy of heaven that is more
sound than al-Bukhaari and Muslim, after the Qur’aan. End quote.

Majmoo’ al-Fataawa (18/74).

Al-Haafiz Ibn Hajar said, answering criticism of Saheeh
al-Bukhaari:

The answer to that in general terms is:

There is no doubt that al-Bukhaari and then Muslim are
superior to the people of their own era and the imams of this branch of
knowledge who came after them in finding out what is saheeh or sound and
what is mu’allal or faulty. The scholars did not differ concerning the fact
that ‘Ali ibn al-Madeeni was the most knowledgeable of his peers about ‘ilal
al-hadeeth (faults of hadeeth) and that al-Bukhaari learned that from him.
He used to say: I did not feel myself inferior to anyone except ‘Ali ibn
al-Madeeni. Nevertheless, when ‘Ali ibn al-Madeeni heard about al-Bukhaati
saying that he said: Ignore what he says, for he has never seen anyone like
himself. Muhammad ibn Yahya al-Dhuhali was the most knowledgeable of his era
about faults in the hadeeth of al-Zuhri, and both of the two shaykhs (i.e.,
al-Bukhaari and Muslim) learned that from him. Al-Farbari narrated that
al-Bukhaari said: I did not include any hadeeth in al-Saheeh until
after I prayed istikhaarah, asking Allaah for guidance, and being certain of
its soundness. Makki ibn ‘Abd-Allaah said: I heard Muslim ibn al-Hajjaaj
say: I showed this book of mine to Abu Zur’ah al-Raazi and every report in
which he indicated there was some fault in it, I omitted it. Once it is
known and established that they did not narrate any hadeeth except those in
which there were no faults, or in which there were faults but they did not
damage the hadeeth in their view, then the view of the one who criticized
them is to be understood as being opposed to what they determined was sound.
Therefore there is no doubt that they have more knowledge than others
concerning that, so this criticism carries little weight. This is in
general.

But with regard to the details of the matter, the ahaadeeth
which have been criticized may be divided into categories:

1.

Those concerning which the narrators differed, adding or
omitting names in the isnaad. If the author of al-Saheeh narrated it
with a longer isnaad, and the critic criticized it on the basis of the
shorter isnaad, then it is a criticism that is to be rejected. And if the
author of al-Saheeh narrated it with the shorter isnaad and the
critic criticized it on the basis of the longer isnaad, then his objection
implies that there is an interruption in the isnaad of the hadeeth which is
regarded as saheeh by the author [i.e., al-Bukhaari]. The answer on behalf
of the author of al-Saheeh is that he narrated such reports because
there are other, corroborating reports or other evidence for regarding it as
strong, and for that reason the hadeeth is strengthened to the point of
being saheeh.

2.

Where the reports differ in that the names of some men in the
isnaad are changed. The answer to this is that just because there is a
difference in some of the names of the isnaad it does not mean that this is
proof of a fault, because mere differences do not mean that there is a
problem which renders the hadeeth da’eef (weak). Therefore this argument
should also be ignored.

3.

Where some narrators narrated additional material that is not
present in the reports which were narrated by many narrators or where
narrators who were known for greater precision did not narrate this
additional material. This does not mean that the hadeeth is to be regarded
as faulty unless the additional material contradicts it in such a way that
it is too difficult to reconcile the two. But if it is not difficult to
reconcile the additional material with the hadeeth then it does not mean
that the hadeeth is to be regarded as faulty, unless there is strong
evidence that the additional material that is narrated alongside the hadeeth
is the words of one of the narrators. What comes under this category is
something to be taken into account, as in hadeeth no. 34.

4.

What is narrated only by some narrators who are those who are
classed as da’eef or weak. There is nothing of this type in al-Saheeh
apart from two hadeeths, and it became clear that they both have
corroborating evidence.

5.

Hadeeth in which some of the men of the isnaad are determined
to have been confused. In some cases this confusion may damage the hadeeth
and in other cases it does not.

6.

Cases where there are differences in the wording of the text.
Most cases of this type do not lead to regarding the hadeeth as faulty,
because it is possible to reconcile the differences, or determine which is
more correct. But Daaraqutni and other imams did not examine this issue with
regard to these two books as they discussed the issue of isnaads. What they
did not examine in this regard includes: the hadeeth of Jaabir which tells
the story of the camel; his hadeeth concerning the paying off of his
father’s debt; the hadeeth of Raafi’ ibn Khudayj about al-mukhaabarah; the
hadeeth of Abu Hurayrah concerning the story of Dhu’l-Yadayn; the hadeeth of
Sahl ibn Sa’d concerning the story of the woman who offered herself in
marriage to the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him);
the hadeeth of Anas about starting recitation of al-Faatihah with the words
“al-hamdu Lillaahi Rabbi l-‘aalameen”; the hadeeth of Ibn ‘Abbaas about the
case of the woman who asked about the vows of her mother and sister; and
others.

This is a summary of the categories of criticism levelled at
al-Saheeh according to the imams. I have listed them, examined them,
categorized them and explained them, and none of them undermine the basic
matter of al-Saheeh, praise be to Allaah, except in a few rare cases. End
quote.

Hadiy al-Saari (345-346)

See also the answer to question no.
20153

And Allaah knows best.