My Shia friend have posed a question to me as to how we can claim Sahih Bkhari to be Authentic when Imam Bukhari (May Allah Mercy be upon him) was present 400 years after the death of the Prophet.

Published Date: 2002-05-27

Praise be to Allaah.

Imam al-Bukhaari (may Allaah have mercy on him) died in 256 AH, i.e., 245 years after the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) died, not as your Shi’i friend claims. But these people are natural liars so this claim comes as no surprise. That does not mean that al-Bukhaari could have narrated directly from the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him); this is not what is meant at all. Rather we mention this here for the purpose of making things clear.

But how can we depend upon Saheeh al-Bukhaari when al-Bukhaari never met the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) in person?

The answer is that in his Saheeh, al-Bukhaari did not narrate anything directly from the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), rather he narrated from trustworthy shaykhs, who attained the highest degree of memorization, precision and trustworthiness, who in turn had narrated from equally reliable shaykhs, all the way back to the Sahaabah who narrated from the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). The smallest number of narrators between al-Bukhaari and the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) is three. So we rely upon Saheeh al-Bukhaari because he chose the narrators from whom he transmitted hadeeth with the utmost care, and they are the most trustworthy. Moreover, he would not write down any hadeeth in his Saheeh until he had done ghusl, then prayed two rak’ahs and prayed istikhaarah, asking Allaah to guide him with regard to writing down this hadeeth; then he would write it down. It took him sixteen years to write this book, which the ummah accepted and unanimously agreed that what is narrated in it is saheeh; and Allaah has protected this ummah from agreeing upon misguidance.

Imam al-Nawawi (may Allaah have mercy on him) said in his introduction to Sharh Muslim (1/14): “The scholars (may Allaah have mercy on them) are agreed that the most sound of books after the Qur’aan are the two Saheehs of al-Bukhaari and Muslim, which were accepted by the ummah. The book of al-Bukhaari is the more sound and the more beneficial of the two.”

If you ask this Shi’i (or Raafidi) about the sayings of ‘Ali (may Allaah be pleased with him) that their leaders have transmitted, and the sayings of al-Baaqir and Ja’far al-Saadiq, and others of Ahl al-Bayt (may Allaah have mercy on them), whether they heard them from them or transmitted them with isnaads (chains of narrators), the answer will be clear. There is a great difference between the isnaads of al-Bukhaari and the isnaads of these misguided people who cannot find the names of their chain of narrators in the reports except in the books of the weak narrators, liars and deficient narrators.

The claim made by this Raafidi (Shi’i) is simply the first step in attacking the Sunnah which demonstrates that their madhhab is false and their beliefs are corrupt. They cannot help but try to stir up trouble with these misguided notions. But they can never succeed, for the truth is clear and falsehood is confused.

Moreover we advise you – may Allaah help you – to look for Sunni friends from whose company you can benefit, and to avoid making friends with followers of bid’ah. The scholars have warned against making friends with them because they will keep on trying until they take a person far away from the truth by using all kinds of wiles and causing confusion.

We ask Allaah to help us and you to follow the Sunnah and to keep away from bid’ah and those who follow it.

And Allaah knows best.

https://islamqa.info/en/20153

Rashduct4luv:
My Shia friend have posed a question to me as to how we can claim Sahih Bkhari to be Authentic when Imam Bukhari (May Allah Mercy be upon him) was present 400 years after the death of the Prophet.

# liar liar. Which of your shia friend posed a question to you o ?

# And where did he said Bukhari died 400 years after Nabi's demise?

You (islamqa or rashidi or whoever posted such) are a bastard shameless liar.


# In fact, if you really want to know how empty islamqa is, try to post our submissions (word for word) to them.

Again, we stand on our feet that Imam Bukhari was NEVER the author of the present day Sahih that is forged in his name. Our submissions stand and no one has been able to refute it so far. Here's it once again:

www.nairaland.com/3108197/wrote-sahih-bukhari-obviously-not#66403682

AlBaqir:


# liar liar. Which of your shia friend posed a question to you o ?

# And where did he said Bukhari died 400 years after Nabi's demise?

You (islamqa or rashidi or whoever posted such) are a bastard shameless liar.


# In fact, if you really want to know how empty islamqa is, try to post our submissions (word for word) to them.

Again, we stand on our feet that Imam Bukhari was NEVER the author of the present day Sahih that is forged in his name. Our submissions stand and no one has been able to refute it so far. Here's it once again:

www.nairaland.com/3108197/wrote-sahih-bukhari-obviously-not#66403682

An authentic liar calling someone else a liar! A filthy Shiite like you tried to influence an inquisitive Muslim who asked the question.


You act like a kid!

If the website is empty, then Shi'a websites is full of scam and lies!

Rashduct4luv:


An authentic liar calling someone else a liar! A filthy Shiite like you tried to influence an inquisitive Muslim who asked the question.


You act like a kid!

If the website is empty, then Shi'a websites is full of scam and lies!

Don't let us take abuse forget the main issue. I know say you Salafi better past everybody in abusive talk.

# Yeah! To the main issue: we challenge you and your contradictory liar liar website based on our submission that Bukhari was never the author of today's Sahih al-mukhtasar.

Again, for the 100th times, he's our submission
www.nairaland.com/3108197/wrote-sahih-bukhari-obviously-not#66403682

Rashduct4luv:
him);

The answer is that in his Saheeh, al-Bukhaari did not narrate anything directly from the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), rather he narrated from trustworthy shaykhs, who attained the highest degree of memorization, precision and trustworthiness, who in turn had narrated from equally reliable shaykhs, all the way back to the Sahaabah who narrated from the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him).
https://islamqa.info/en/20153

Subhanallah! do you know this is what you guys accused Sufis of, that the sufis claim they got their narrations from their sheikh who got it from his sheikh who got it from his sheikh and who got it from sahaba who got it from rasulullah(saw). So i wonder why you guys hate sufis when Imam Bukhari did the same?.

Listen to Dr. Bilal from 7 mins where he accused sufis of silsila or chain which islamqa acknowledged as well. So i dont know why people hate them for it. Dr. Bilal goes further to say such a claim (silisala - like that of Imam Bukhari) is false. That means he is accusing Sahih Bukhari as well since he got his alleged collection of ahadith the same way.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JPf4aFEzJ-0

Empiree:
Subhanallah! do you know this is what you guys accused Sufis of, that the sufis claim they got their narrations from their sheikh who got it from his sheikh who got it from his sheikh and who got it from sahaba who got it from rasulullah(saw). So i wonder why you guys hate sufis when Imam Bukhari did the same?.

Listen to Dr. Bilal from 7 mins where he accused sufis of silsila or chain which islamqa acknowledged as well. So i dont know why people hate them for it. Dr. Bilal goes further to say such a claim (silisala) like that of Imam Bukhari is false. That means he is accusing Sahih Bukhari as well since he got his alleged collection of ahadith the same way.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JPf4aFEzJ-0

Suffees are to their Sheikhs as the dead is to the person bathing it. Stop that comparison! Bukhari and Muslim tried their best to select the best hadiths in their Books without taqlid common among soofees!

Empiree:
Subhanallah! do you know this is what you guys accused Sufis of, that the sufis claim they got their narrations from their sheikh who got it from his sheikh who got it from his sheikh and who got it from sahaba who got it from rasulullah(saw). So i wonder why you guys hate sufis when Imam Bukhari did the same?.

Listen to Dr. Bilal from 7 mins where he accused sufis of silsila or chain which islamqa acknowledged as well. So i dont know why people hate them for it. Dr. Bilal goes further to say such a claim (silisala) like that of Imam Bukhari is false. That means he is accusing Sahih Bukhari as well since he got his alleged collection of ahadith the same way.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JPf4aFEzJ-0

See how you caught rashidi nappy.

Rashduct4luv:


Suffees are to their Sheikhs as the dead is to the person bathing it. Stop that comparison! Bukhari and Muslim tried their best to select the best hadiths in their Books without taqlid common among soofees!

You still beating your chest. This doesn't refutes the fact that he got narrations from from from from from from until silsila reached nabi(saw). And i told you before the hadith gathering was made by mostly the sufis. But then, they didnt really have to claim the title for themselves. Problem with sahih hadith today is internet. Since its emergence, they placed hadith on editable platform to make changes. And i cited example last year that there used to be written "niyat" i:e nawaitu xyz before salat and before ritual bath in sahih Bukhari. These have been expunged now. This is not 'dem say'. I used to read it myself and lecturer would ask us where we got dalil from because she required evidence of "nayah" we made before janaba.

Now those things are gone but still preserved in some 'tira'

.

Empiree:
You still beating your chest. This doesn't refutes the fact that he got narrations from from from from from from until silsila reached nabi(saw). And i told you before the hadith gathering was made by mostly the sufis. But then, they didnt really have to claim the title for themselves. Problem with sahih hadith today is internet. Since its emergence, they placed hadith on editable platform to make changes. And i cited example last year that there used to be written "niyat" i:e nawaitu xyz before salat and before ritual bath in sahih Bukhari. These have been expunged now. This is not 'dem say'. I used to read it myself and lecturer would ask us where we got dalil from because she required evidence of "nayah" we made before janaba.

Now those things are gone but still preserved in some 'tira'

Nawaitu! If he doesnt get it from from from... as you say where else do you expect him to get it from? I don't really know ur problem bro. Please tell me ur P.

Rashduct4luv:


Nawaitu! If he doesnt get it from from from... as you say where else do you expect him to get it from? I don't really know ur problem bro. Please tell me ur P.

I don't have problem you do. You are the ones who said verbally making niyat is bidia and I am simply telling you that this verbal mumbling of Niyah was once documented in sahih bukhari and Muslim. And I told you I used to recite intention before salat but now we understand that it is not requirement.

What I am trying to tell you is that if you were concious in the 80s and 90s that I grew up you would know what I am talking about. In another word, I'm saying sahih bukhari and Muslim were edited at some point. That's my point. Take it or leave it.

As for where he got Hadith narrations from, I'm simply telling you to stop accusing sufis for instance; for saying they got their narration from their sheikh who also got it from his Sheikh, who also got it from his Sheikh till traced back to rosulullah(saw) because that's what imam bukhari did. How's that difficult to understand?

Empiree:
I don't have problem you do. You are the ones who said verbally making niyat is bidia and I am simply telling you that this verbal mumbling of Niyah was once documented in sahih bukhari and Muslim. And I told you I used to recite intention before salat but now we understand that it is not requirement.

What I am trying to tell you is that if you were concious in the 80s and 90s that I grew up you would know what I am talking about. In another word, I'm saying sahih bukhari and Muslim were edited at some point. That's my point. Take it or leave it.

As for where he got Hadith narrations from, I'm simply telling you to stop accusing sufis for instance; for saying they got their narration from their sheikh who also got it from his Sheikh, who also got it from his Sheikh till traced back to rosulullah(saw) because that's what imam bukhari did. How's that difficult to understand?

I have never heard a Suffi quoting authentic naration before. And that Nawaetu was expunged from the Saheehayn that one is a fallacy! The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Actions are but by intentions, and everyone shall have but that which he intended…” (Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 1; Muslim, 1907).

Intention is a thing of the mind not spoken!

Rashduct4luv:


I have never heard a Suffi quoting authentic naration before.

Dang! You just goofed. This is the problem I have long suspected. You not gonna change. Before your were born they have been muslims, that's why you are one today. So I wonder if they never quoted "authentic narration before", how did you know Islam today?. Your statement here is called bigotry.

And that Nawaetu was expunged from the Saheehayn that one is a fallacy!

there is no need to argue this. It is like atheist telling you prophets didn't exist just because they are not physically here today. That's why I said if you were conscious in the 80s and 90s you would know what I am talking about. Back in 2015 on "Jinn Stories" thread by tbaba, we scrutinized a Hadith online including albaqir. That particular website CLEARLY skipped or erased a phrase. Tbaba had no choice but to say [I]"it could have been genuine error".[/I] I am not saying this to undermine sahih bukhari. I am just telling you this particular issue could have been deliberately removed from modern edition. I am sure it was there bcuz I read them a lot back then. Take it or leave it.

Empiree:

What I am trying to tell you is that if you were concious in the 80s and 90s that I grew up you would know what I am talking about. In another word, I'm saying sahih bukhari and Muslim were edited at some point. That's my point. Take it or leave it.

# You are 100% correct because that is a fact. Remember I sent you a screenshot of Imam Ibn Hajar al-Haythami who referenced a particular hadith in Sahih Muslim; but the same hadith is unfounded in today's Sahih Muslim.

The worst among these editing is the English translation of Muhsin Khan. There are lots of Arabic texts within a context he knowingly or unknowingly left out without translating them into English.

Unfortunately it is not only those two books that are being continuously edited. Many other prominent books have suffered the same fate. The same problem exists in Shi'a books of ahadith too.

# Worst part is now that US has confirmed a certain of office of hers will focus on editing Saudi wahabi books.

Empiree:
Dang! You just goofed. This is the problem I have long suspected. You not gonna change. Before your were born they have been muslims, that's why you are one today. So I wonder if they never quoted "authentic narration before", how did you know Islam today?. Your statement here is called bigotry.


there is no need to argue this. It is like atheist telling you prophets didn't exist just because they are not physically here today. That's why I said if you were conscious in the 80s and 90s you would know what I am talking about. Back in 2015 on "Jinn Stories" thread by tbaba, we scrutinized a Hadith online including albaqir. That particular website CLEARLY skipped or erased a phrase. Tbaba had no choice but to say [I]"it could have been genuine error".[/I] I am not saying this to undermine sahih bukhari. I am just telling you this particular issue could have been deliberately removed from modern edition. I am sure it was there bcuz I read them a lot back then. Take it or leave it.

So (some or) all the Books of hadith has been edited? By whom? When? And only you and a few others noticed right? That is silly! I never goofed just stating the obvious.

Rashduct4luv:


So (some or) all the Books of hadith has been edited? By whom? When? And only you and a few others noticed right? That is silly! I never goofed just stating the obvious.

Afala Ta'qilun?

Empiree:
Afala Ta'qilun?

The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Telling lies about me is not like telling lies about anyone else. Whoever tells lies about me deliberately, let him take his place in Hell.” Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 1229. It was also narrated by Muslim in the Introduction to his Saheeh, without the phrase “Telling lies about me is not like telling lies about anyone else.”

And the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Do not tell lies about me, for whoever tells lies about me will enter Hell.” Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 106. And he (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Whoever narrates a hadeeth from me that he thinks is false is one of the liars.” Narrated by Muslim (1).

I think you should think and reflect yourself!

Rashduct4luv:


The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Telling lies about me is not like telling lies about anyone else. Whoever tells lies about me deliberately, let him take his place in Hell.” Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 1229. It was also narrated by Muslim in the Introduction to his Saheeh, without the phrase “Telling lies about me is not like telling lies about anyone else.”

And the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Do not tell lies about me, for whoever tells lies about me will enter Hell.” Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 106. And he (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Whoever narrates a hadeeth from me that he thinks is false is one of the liars.” Narrated by Muslim (1).

I think you should think and reflect yourself!

# So does the hadith automatically made hadith collectors, hadith documentators, hadith translators trustworthy and infallible?

So why is it that whenever I quote Sahih Bukhari muslims accuse me of fabricating hadiths?

Narrated Qatada:
Anas bin Malik said, "The Prophet used to have sex with all his wives in a round, during the day and night and they were eleven in number." I asked Anas, "Had the Prophet the strength for it?" Anas replied, "We used to say that the Prophet was given the strength of thirty (men)." And Sa'id said on the authority of Qatada that Anas had told him about nine wives only (not eleven). (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 1, Book 5, Number 268)

Narrated Anas bin Malik:
The Prophet used to have sex with all his wives in one night and he had nine wives at that time.
(Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 1, Book 5, Number 282; see also parallel hadiths in Vol. 7, Book 62, Numbers 6 and 142)

Rashduct4luv:


The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Telling lies about me is not like telling lies about anyone else. Whoever tells lies about me deliberately, let him take his place in Hell.” Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 1229. It was also narrated by Muslim in the Introduction to his Saheeh, without the phrase “Telling lies about me is not like telling lies about anyone else.”

And the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Do not tell lies about me, for whoever tells lies about me will enter Hell.” Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 106. And he (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Whoever narrates a hadeeth from me that he thinks is false is one of the liars.” Narrated by Muslim (1).

I think you should think and reflect yourself!

Again, afala Ta'qilun?

I have read from albaqir and empiree. It's cabbage and mere lies to say that some parts sohihain have been expunged. The copies they talked about are the abridged and concise versions of the hadith. The original copies still remain originals but in bulky and expensive volumes. These guys can't afford one but chose to criticise the hadith. It's the traditional trait and trick of rafidis when seeking to claim relevance. The Shiites are not Muslims as they refute the prophethood of Muhammad blaming Jibril for the colossal mistake. They also claim the Quran is distorted and incomplete let alone the hadith. Their Quran has a chapter called suratu alwilaya.
The best you can do is to read books written by their deviant imams.

peace4omar:
I have read from alb.aqir and emp.iree. It's cabbage and mere lies to say that some parts sohihain have been expunged. The copies they talked about are the abridged and concise versions of the hadith. The original copies still remain originals but in bulky and expensive volumes. These guys can't afford one but chose to criticise the hadith. It's the traditional trait and trick of rafidis when seeking to claim relevance. The Shiites are not Muslims as they refute the prophethood of Muhammad blaming Jibril for the colossal mistake. They also claim the Quran is distorted and incomplete let alone the hadith. Their Quran has a chapter called suratu alwilaya.
The best you can do is to read books written by their deviant imams.

what's my own buddy?. I have told you guys to listen to Sheikh Albani RA on this. So what I said isn't new. Besides most of you guys just became concious of religion perhaps 10yrs ago. You were most likely headless in the 80s and 90s. If those baba used to recite niyat aloud from sahih books, where are those niyat in 21 century in those books?.

Any other things you said in your post are irrelevant.

peace4omar:
The copies they talked about are the abridged and concise versions of the hadith. The original copies still remain originals but in bulky and expensive volumes.

# Hey yah! Sorry, we are not talking of abridge version o. We are talking about the so-called original versions.

peace4omar:

These guys can't afford one but chose to criticise the hadith.

What an allegation! Please don't say what you have no knowledge of again o. Its a sin on its own, and its foolish on social level.

peace4omar:

It's the traditional trait and trick of rafidis when seeking to claim relevance. The Shiites are not Muslims as they refute the prophethood of Muhammad blaming Jibril for the colossal mistake.

Hmmmm, so there is this jahil thinking in this modern age?!

# So, if that is true about the Shi'a, then Sahih Bukhari, Sahih Muslim, and other Sunni books of ahadith should be instantly discarded because they have recorded lots and lots of ahadith from those rafidis-shia.

It sounds strange to you abi that Sahih Bukhari, sahih Muslim etc narrated lots of ahadith from Rafidis

Really, from the look of your comment, you have miles to learn.

peace4omar:

They also claim the Quran is distorted and incomplete let alone the hadith. Their Quran has a chapter called suratu alwilaya
The best you can do is to read books written by their deviant imams.

Kindly help us provide that "their Quran" since you have seen it. Other claimers like you were not able to provide it.

"Say: Provide your evidence if you are truthful" - Qur'an.

AlBaqir:



# So does the hadith automatically made hadith collectors, hadith documentators, hadith translators trustworthy and infallible?

Is it possible for Imam Bukhari's students to add to his book or forge his book and then include an hell fire ticket for themselves?

May Allah bless the Imam and his students and may He disgrace all those who wishes to bring them down by stirring up dust where there isn't any.

Empiree:
what's my own buddy?. I have told you guys to listen to Sheikh Albani RA on this. So what I said isn't new. Besides most of you guys just became concious of religion perhaps 10yrs ago. You were most likely headless in the 80s and 90s. If those baba used to recite niyat aloud from sahih books, where are those niyat in 21 century in those books?.

Any other things you said in your post are irrelevant.

Baba 80, you read another book, not the Saheehayn. Don't forget that, there are many books then that were written due to the level of knowledge of our Shayks then.

Again, you read another book and you thought it was the Saheehayn.

Empiree:
what's my own buddy?. I have told you guys to listen to Sheikh Albani RA on this. So what I said isn't new. Besides most of you guys just became concious of religion perhaps 10yrs ago. You were most likely headless in the 80s and 90s. If those baba used to recite niyat aloud from sahih books, where are those niyat in 21 century in those books?.

Any other things you said in your post are irrelevant.

Mr. Afala ta'qilun! Why will you say some just become conscious of deen just 10 years ago? Even someone who started last year can surpass you in. The babas you mentioned tried their effort to be on the right! They were involved in a lot of bidi'a which they thought was right! Sahih Bukhari was abridged and no part of it was expunged! And stop mentioning Imam Albani cos he only said what is obvious as no book can be as Saheeh as the Qur'an!

Some Babas still shake to the left and right while saying amin after reciting Fathia. Was this expunged too from Sahih Empiree?

iamgenius:

Baba 80, you read another book, not the Saheehayn. Don't forget that, there are many books then that were written due to the level of knowledge of our Shayks then.

Again, you read another book and you thought it was the Saheehayn.

they didn't read Saheehayn or Saheehayn didn't exist back then?. Yes, your are right that it was different book but they were extracted just like today's fortress of Muslim

Rashduct4luv:


Mr. Afala ta'qilun! Why will you say some just become conscious of deen just 10 years ago? Even someone who started last year can surpass you in. The babas you mentioned tried their effort to be on the right! They were involved in a lot of bidi'a which they thought was right! Sahih Bukhari was abridged and no part of it was expunged! And stop mentioning Imam Albani cos he only said what is obvious as no book can be as Saheeh as the Qur'an!

Some Babas still shake to the left and right while saying amin after reciting Fathia. Was this expunged too from Sahih Empir.ee?

bold simply addressed your responses that are quite irrelevant to my post shows you didn't understand.

Yes, they shake left and right back then bcuz, their understanding was the need to 'waive' at pronouncement of "waladooooooolin" by leaning to the side.. Doesn't mean they were right. And there were shuyukh at that time who disagree but they never made it bidia thing bcuz it is not, simple. This is different from Hadith which warns against unnecessary movements in salat. Aren't some people still moving unnecessarily in salat today regardless?.

Rashduct4luv:


Is it possible for Imam Bukhari's students to add to his book or forge his book and then include an hell fire ticket for themselves?

May Allah bless the Imam and his students and may He disgrace all those who wishes to bring them down by stirring up dust where there isn't any.

# You love running away from reality. The fact is you are too insecure and doing great injustice to your nafs.

What you just said is exactly what Christian usually say to defend their bible because there is a curse to whoever add or delete from the Bible. So, does that make bible 100% correct?

You yourself said Qur'an is the only perfect book. Meaning ALL other books with no exception have discrepancies in them (as Qur'an itself reveals). Furthermore, neither Imam Bukhari nor his students were ma'soom. Meaning they are capable of lying, capable of editing hadith, capable of making errors etc. If sahabah were capable of wrong doing, who then were Tabi'ieen and tabi Tabi'ieen, and several criminal translators and hadith editors we have today?!


That is the reality you should get into your heart.

^
I was going to respond with your same reply to him but decided to ignore him. He doesn't think.

AlBaqir:


# You love running away from reality. The fact is you are too insecure and doing great injustice to your nafs.

What you just said is exactly what Christian usually say to defend their bible because there is a curse to whoever add or delete from the Bible. So, does that make bible 100% correct?

You yourself said Qur'an is the only perfect book. Meaning ALL other books with no exception have discrepancies in them (as Qur'an itself reveals). Furthermore, neither Imam Bukhari nor his students were ma'soom. Meaning they are capable of lying, capable of editing hadith, capable of making errors etc. If sahabah were capable of wrong doing, who then were Tabi'ieen and tabi Tabi'ieen, and several criminal translators and hadith editors we have today?!


That is the reality you should get into your heart.

Comparing the Bible to our Hadith is like comparing black and white! Well, why wont you compare the Bible..? Your Manhaj is closer to theirs na! Did the Christians claim any teacher student relationship in their revelation story?

A Muslim Scholar Exposes The False Hadith Culture That Is Corrupting Islam


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CC4TuYrSNJs&fulldescription=1&client=mv-google&hl=en&gl=US